I'm not against the patch, I'm actually indifferent. Lets wait for Nikita's opinion.
I took just a quick look over "static class" RFC. I'll need to think more about it. Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM, guilhermebla...@gmail.com < guilhermebla...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > As I said, these patches are not huge beneficial, but enablers. Enablers in > the sense that further development over class/interface/trait simplified. > It's not a short win benefit, but a mid/long term. > > Also defer currently checks done in zend_compile to Bison (such as trait > extends and implements), addresses small inconsistencies (such as an > extension class that extend an interface) and also easier to comprehend for > newcomers (such as trait flag value). > > Now development that happens over this (such as abstract final/static > class, package private class) become easy, as you can see in PR for static > class for example. > > Cheers, > > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Damien Tournoud <d...@damz.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Damien Tournoud <d...@damz.org> wrote: > > > PDO statement should not be made final, or this is a breaking language > > > change (requiring an RFC and a 2/3 majority). > > > > I see from the PR that it's PDORow, not PDOStatement. That one is not > > actually exposed as such to userspace, so it is fine. > > > > Damien > > > > > > -- > Guilherme Blanco > MSN: guilhermebla...@hotmail.com > GTalk: guilhermeblanco > Toronto - ON/Canada >
