Jochem Maas wrote:
> Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>> Jochem Maas wrote:
>>> Pierre wrote:
>>>> On 7/6/07, Stefan Priebsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There must be a reason to upgrade to a new PHP version (usually
>>>>> features, maybe performance increase etc.). But there also must be no
>>>>> reason not to upgrade. But you all know this, it has been said before.
>>>> Namespace is one _very_ important reason. If we need a "marketing"
>>>> argument for PHP6 outside unicode, it is the one. I would also like to
>>>> do not backport it (but we can backport it as well, my main problem is
>>>> only this flag).
>>> late static binding is another reason (are we still going to get that?)
>> well .. last I heard we are still stuck on this one, since it would
>> require expanding the general zval structure.
> 
> oh, I see (well kind of), does this mean it may get taken off the table?
> or is it slated as definite (assuming a satisfactory implementation can be
> created)?

I'll answer myself, as I've just come across Derick's meeting notes ... it's 
seems
LSB is in and Marcus has the honor of suggesting an implementation.

I wish him well with that and hope he succeeds!
if he does I'll have to make him my hero for day. :-)
and if he doesn't then at least he tried to do what I wish I could.

> 
> sorry to be a bore about LSB, it's just that it's the thing I look forward to
> most :-), I have missed it since php5 was still in RC and I really believe 
> that
> LSB would improve php's OO model.
> 
> thank you for your feedback,
> regards,
> Jochem
> 
>> regards,
>> Lukas
>>
> 

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to