Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:98649 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 71795 invoked from network); 28 Mar 2017 10:31:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Mar 2017 10:31:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=derick@php.net; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=derick@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 82.113.146.227 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: derick@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.113.146.227 xdebug.org Received: from [82.113.146.227] ([82.113.146.227:37750] helo=xdebug.org) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 0D/A0-61593-F8B3AD85 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 05:31:45 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by xdebug.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B8DB10C132; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:31:40 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:31:40 +0100 (BST) X-X-Sender: derick@singlemalt.home.derickrethans.nl To: Marco Pivetta cc: Wes , PHP Internals List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY="8323329-587940917-1490697100=:1685" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV][RFC][VOTE] Allow abstract function override From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans) --8323329-587940917-1490697100=:1685 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Marco Pivetta wrote: > Voted "no" because of this paragraph: >=20 > > This RFC proposes to allow this, even if it has very few uses, and=20 > > because there is no reason to disallow a compatible redefinition. >=20 > I couldn't see a use-case. >=20 > In addition to that, this breaks the assumption that the topmost abstract > signature is the authoritative one. That is a subtle BC break, but still = a > BC break. Yes, I know I'm annoying, sorry =F0=9F=98=A5 As there is a subtle BC break, then that needs to be mentioned in the=20 RFC under "Backward Incompatible Changes". cheers, Derick --8323329-587940917-1490697100=:1685--