> On Mar 23, 2020, at 13:09, Mike Schinkel <m...@newclarity.net> wrote: > >> On Mar 23, 2020, at 1:51 PM, Ben Ramsey <b...@benramsey.com> wrote: >> >>> On Mar 23, 2020, at 12:34, Mike Schinkel <m...@newclarity.net> wrote: >>> >>> Rowan, >>> >>> Based on your responses now I am not at all sure what you were driving at. >>> >>> I think you are making detail points because of nuances of PECL and bundled >>> vs. unbundled etc, while I was trying to make a higher level case. >>> >>> So let me restate the thesis: >>> >>> "When discussing a potential new feature suggesting that it be implemented >>> in a way that it might not actually be available (via PECL, unbundled, >>> disabled, whatever) is not a viable alternative for many PHP developers >>> unless integral to the feature is a need to make it optional.” >> >> >> I think Rowan is making the point that *most* of the features found in the >> core PHP distribution are *optional*. Distributions and hosts are choosing >> to enable them. There are very few things in the core distribution that >> cannot be disabled at build time. >> >> I’ve run into this numerous times in my userland OSS libraries. It came up >> recently with the ctype functions. Someone’s host had these disabled, for >> whatever reason, so I had to use a polyfill library to provide the >> functionality, for those cases. > > Which makes an even stronger case for why a userland accessible extension > mechanism is needed. > > Did you see my reply to you about the various options for userland > extensibility with the (IMO) most promising one being adding support for WASM > to PHP core?
Yes, I did. I don’t know enough about WASM right now to comment on it. Cheers, Ben
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
