Hi
Am 2026-02-14 15:00, schrieb Mirco Babin:
This argument has convinced me. And writing it down helps clear my
mind.
Great, thank you!
All that said: If you are willing prepare an initial RFC Draft based
on
the official RFC template (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/template) and to
go
through the process of officially discussion the RFC, I'm happy to do
the “polishing” work as an official coauthor / mentor to make sure
there
are no missing bits or other mistakes. I'm also willing to get someone
to do the implementation (potentially I'm doing it myself).
Do we have a deal? :-)
I have prepared a RFC at
https://gist.github.com/MircoBabin/aaa574297c8d1baa879f19c99ce28e93
Are you still willing to carry out the implementation? If so:
Yes, I'm still willing to help out with the implementation (or to find
someone to to the implementation if the RFC passes).
- Should I mention you as coauthor?
For the “only warn on new at runtime” variant, I personally don't agree
with the proposal and thus don't want to officially co-author it. But
I'm nevertheless willing to help with the implementation and with
feedback to ensure that the RFC is in the best possible shape
policy-wise. As previously mentioned, I believe it should consistently
warn at compile-time and not make a difference between “using new” and
“calling __construct() manually”.
- In the first chapter, what wording should "Implementation" be?
- What wording should "Patches and Tests" be?
It's okay to leave that out for now in both cases. An implementation is
not necessary to vote on the RFC and it can be filled in later.
The next step would be registering a Wiki account at
https://wiki.php.net/rfc?do=register and then request RFC karma, so you
can create a proper RFC page and “officially” start the discussion.
Having the page will also make the RFC text much more convenient to read
compared to the Gist.
I've taken a quick look at the text and “format-wise” it seems to
contain all the necessary information. Great work!
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
