Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91524
Return-Path: <TonyMarston@hotmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 29714 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2016 09:14:51 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 7 Mar 2016 09:14:51 -0000
X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.177.120.119 marston-home.demon.co.uk  
Received: from [80.177.120.119] ([80.177.120.119:21439] helo=localhost.localdomain)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 43/5B-29316-A864DD65 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 04:14:51 -0500
Message-ID: <43.5B.29316.A864DD65@pb1.pair.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <1F.91.55238.41F10D65@pb1.pair.com> <CAHvhOfhYpnjkSjuo09TY7irhgW5UxNYZcWqtAr0iCcUAqJUgqw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKnqCEY7art1GUWG=Pm0wyPGQmYp0Dq8oxdohgBkSGq+O_BTZw@mail.gmail.com> <FA.10.10408.29514D65@pb1.pair.com> <56D42CD3.6020602@gmail.com> <DB.E1.07778.3D165D65@pb1.pair.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> <CAMPTd_B6VNQymDJo2MX03KrOWd1Mcfjg6gNY=GO1swxV8snrKQ@mail.gmail.com> <0B.E0.29316.019CBD65@pb1.pair.com> <56DBFDB5.1010806@fleshgrinder.com>
In-Reply-To: <56DBFDB5.1010806@fleshgrinder.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 09:14:31 -0000
Lines: 6
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:56DBFDB5.1010806@fleshgrinder.com...
>
>On 3/6/2016 7:07 AM, Stephen Coakley wrote:

<snip>

>@Tony Marston: you are always saying that "this is "longevity" [...]
>they will move on to another language" but I do not see such a language,
>not a single one. There are those who break with every release
>(node.js), those who break hard with a major release (Python), and those
>who are carefully crafted to contain proper CHANGELOGs, upgrade paths,
>deprecations, ... (Java, C derivatives) and then there is PHP where it
>is completely random based on the people who saw the actual thread on
>the mailing list and shouted the loudest.

Just because YOU have not encountered such languages does not mean that they 
do not exist. Before using PHP I used two other languages for over a decade 
each, and both of them went through several upgrades which added new 
functionality WITHOUT breaking existing functionality. That takes brains and 
discipline, something which appears to be lacking in the PHP community.

Some of us write enterprise software which is expected to last for a long 
time, not toy websites which are built with the expectation "use once then 
throw away and start again". Enterprise applications have very large code 
bases, and it would be a VERY expensive and time consuming exercise to 
perform a major rewrite with every major release of the language.

I do not mind new features being added to the language provided that I am 
not forced to use them. I do not mind old features being removed because of 
genuine security issues. But I *DO* mind having to refactor my code just 
because some numpty decides to remove a long-standing feature just because 
it does not fit in with today's fashion. Excuses such as "it's redundant" or 
"it's inconsistent" or "I don't use it, and I don't think that anyone else 
should use it" are unacceptable.

Leaving old features alone does not cost anything. Taking them out will take 
effort, both in changing the code and updating the documentation as well as 
the ENORMOUS effort required in userland to update their software. This will 
achieve nothing except to piss a lot of people off.

>Removing old or bad features is absolutely normal

Bad features, Yes. Old features, No.

>and it is what is
>being done in good languages.

That depends on your definition of a "good" language. If you look at the 
language statistics you will see that PHP, with all its quirks, has been in 
the top ten for a very long time. Changing it now will not be an improvement 
to many programmers, it will be a disaster and a reason not to upgrade.

>You want to keep your interfaces clean and
>easy to understand. You do not want them to be cluttered with
>unnecessary features, aliases, argument swapping, ...

Competent programmers have managed with the quirks in PHP for decades, just 
like they have managed with the quirks which exist in every other language.

>Expecting to write some code without any kind of maintenance while
>expecting the systems and software to ensure it runs for the next
>decades without any kind of issues is naive.

No it is not. This was the standard for all the other languages I used 
before PHP. Mind you, those languages were maintained by groups of competent 
professionals and not an army of chimpanzees.

-- 
Tony Marston