On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Benjamin Eberlei <kont...@beberlei.de> wrote:
> This is the opportunity to do the cleanup now, based on phpng branch. Since > the branch is pulic on Github, how is development secret? Benjamin, please check the background before replying. 80% of phpng development has been done secretly, before it was even announced. This development happened while we were discussing, collaborating, working on what will be php-next, including the long due 64bit patch. These actions and discussion have done without any feedback from any of the phpng developers. I can't blame them for not talking about phpng, but to have signed a NDA to do work on PHP itself. > With Zend, Nikita > and laurence putting so much time into this, I fail to see how it would work > to notify everyone of all the changes they are doing. As with every big > project you have to put time into following its progress. I agree though > that Zend (Zeev, Dimitry) could improve the RFC with a little more details, > its focussing a lot on performance. A little? There is no details, there is no doc, there is nothing but a huge set of patches. > As i understood Nikita and laurence they are already improving it based on > the first prototype from month ago. Honestly, if Nikita says converting his > extensions improved the API a lot then this is a good sign for me already. It does not improve anything from an extension developer point of view, or very little. On the other APIs are more dangerous, confusing and inconsistent. >> >> >> The other important parts are things like type hinting for scalar, to >> match the class type hinting, getter/setter (100% positive feedback to >> do what we proposed in the related RFC), object like methods for >> array/string, keeping BC with the existing APIs but providing cleaner >> userfriendlier APIs, etc. It is basically what we can find in the >> ideas page about php6, a page I created months ago and began to >> discuss. These discussions happened here, publically, and you >> (phpng's) never replied to any of them. This is what we should discuss >> now, not tomorrow, not when phpng is merged (if it ever happens). This >> is what allows us to do an informed guess for a possible release cycle >> for php-next. I will post a proposal for a timetable, something that >> could fit for both sides. Do not expect it to match your one year >> requirement, but it won't be three years either. > > > I think internal refactoring is exactly the reason to move from 5 to 6/7 and > not necessarily end user facing changes. i wouldn't mind starting type > hinting, getter/setter or any other discussion again once a 6.0/7.0 is out. > This has worked for PHP since 5.3, 5.4, 5.5. Again once it is out? In which world do you live? that will never happen. We have an opportunity now to do it, let do it. Also I am very surprised to read that from you, I thought you were a strong supporter of these features, or annotations. > I'd rather just take the performance gains, given that PHP as a language > just works(tm), additional features are nice, but not having them is not a > show stopper and shouldn't block something as big as phpng. It is. And performance is by no mean the main PHP problem, despite HHVM. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
