Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91622 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 25902 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2016 20:19:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Mar 2016 20:19:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:57562] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C4/96-18364-8C6D1E65 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2016 15:19:22 -0500 Received: (qmail 24221 invoked by uid 89); 10 Mar 2016 20:19:18 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 24214, pid: 24217, t: 0.0584s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.7?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.155.186.161) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 10 Mar 2016 20:19:18 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: Message-ID: <56E1D6C5.3040002@lsces.co.uk> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 20:19:17 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC Discussion] "var" Deprecation From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 10/03/16 17:16, Colin O'Dell wrote: > - Ensuring that all major arguments for & against have been documented. While the no-brain conversion of one to the other may be acceptable to some, it's both the follow though on associated documentation and a proper review of the code which is CURRENTLY the reason that the code has not yet been converted. I have no problem with code needing to be updated, it's the unnecessary pressure that it has to be done now when there is no gain currently from spending that time. There are other areas of code review that would be more productive, and new libraries replacing the older code may be a more productive way forward than having to address code that is currently doing the job. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk