Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94031
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.46 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BY2PR0201MB178408B05E7A793C6470C7A9BF5C0@BY2PR0201MB1784.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <BY2PR0201MB178408B05E7A793C6470C7A9BF5C0@BY2PR0201MB1784.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 10:09:45 +0700
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU4pJxFGfyNK+RJ117Ap+8FQMpdZEwJ5CFT0WwiF+WNGEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ec762eea0d205355c911a
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Replace "Missing argument" warning with
 "Too few arguments" exception
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

--001a113ec762eea0d205355c911a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi,
On Jun 6, 2016 2:22 PM, "Dmitry Stogov" <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> This mini RFC has been moved to "Voting" state.  Voting
> began on Jun 6 and will close on June 16.
>
> You can find the full RFC at: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/too_few_args
>
> I encourage everyone to read the RFC and cast your vote towards whichever
> option you feel is the best for the language and the community.

I voted no for bc reasons.

I do think it is a relatively small thing but still bc.

The other point that makes me vote no is the short discussion period. The
rule is a minimum discussion time, not a "let choose randomly depending on
what or who". This is worrisome.

My take on it is that the RMs should veto it  (it is part of their roles).

Thanks
Pierre

--001a113ec762eea0d205355c911a--