Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91517 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 50467 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2016 08:56:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 6 Mar 2016 08:56:08 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.177.120.119 marston-home.demon.co.uk Received: from [80.177.120.119] ([80.177.120.119:6974] helo=localhost.localdomain) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id FB/92-29316-7A0FBD65 for ; Sun, 06 Mar 2016 03:56:08 -0500 Message-ID: To: internals@lists.php.net References: <1F.91.55238.41F10D65@pb1.pair.com> <56D42CD3.6020602@gmail.com> <56D57DF4.8000906@gmail.com> <56D5D2AD.6070805@gmail.com> <56D5DDA6.4080607@fleshgrinder.com> <40.73.36499.548B6D65@pb1.pair.com> <56D6BBD0.5010505@gmail.com> <56D73386.3000903@fleshgrinder.com> <86.68.21983.A2508D65@pb1.pair.com> <56D86C00.6000904@fleshgrinder.com> <12.FB.08749.AF759D65@pb1.pair.com> <56DAC26C.50304@fleshgrinder.com> <56DAE00F.2030203@lsces.co.uk> <56DAF480.7030508@fleshgrinder.com> In-Reply-To: <56DAF480.7030508@fleshgrinder.com> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 08:55:50 -0000 Lines: 1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 16.4.3564.1216 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V16.4.3564.1216 X-Posted-By: 80.177.120.119 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC Proposal] var keyword deprecation/removal From: TonyMarston@hotmail.com ("Tony Marston") wrote in message news:56DAF480.7030508@fleshgrinder.com... > >On 3/5/2016 2:33 PM, Lester Caine wrote: >> On 05/03/16 11:26, Fleshgrinder wrote: >>> PHP being a mess is still one of the most quoted arguments against PHP! >>> > >But then again, we are talking about removal and real BC in 6 to 9 years >and support for code that is already roughly 11 years old; so up to 20 >years old then. I guess nobody would ever consider rewriting that code >and instead simply write it anew. I will never accept any BC breaks unless it is to solve a genuine security issue. Saying that it's only going to happen in 6 to 9 years is irrelevant as it should never happen at all. Saying that code which is 11 years old should be rewritten is just plain naive. If a language cannot support code that was written 11 years then that language will be regarded as unstable in the real world. One of the most successful pieces of software is an ERP application from SAP which was started in 1970, and it is still going. Why? Do the maintainers of that software keep rewriting it every 5 years to keep up with the latest programming fashion? The answer is "NO". They cannot afford to rewrite their application every 5 years, and their customers would hate to go through an expensive upgrade every 5 years. The customers expect longevity and stability. What you are trying to do to PHP would destroy that, and for NO GOOD REASON! -- Tony Marston