On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 1:27 PM Marco Pivetta <ocram...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, 19:25 Christian Schneider, <cschn...@cschneid.com> > wrote: > > > Am 24.04.2019 um 19:13 schrieb Marco Pivetta <ocram...@gmail.com>: > > > On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, 19:10 Christian Schneider, <cschn...@cschneid.com > > > > wrote: > > > Am 24.04.2019 um 19:01 schrieb Peter Kokot <peterko...@gmail.com>: > > > > just a friendly reminder that by the time one writes an email here > > > > these tags can be already replaced with the usual ones. > > > > > > A friendly reminder that some people are hosting customer code which > > they do not want to touch but will get support requests once the code > > breaks. > > > > > > - Chris > > > > > > That's normal? Everyone has projects to maintain, and breaking changes > > are common: they're gonna call you for one anyway: if you don't like > that, > > then you are in the wrong line of business. > > > > See Chase Peeler's point: A breaking change should have a reward big > > enough to justify it. > > And that's what where we (including Zeev Suraski and other core > > developers) disagree. > > > > - Chris > > > > Run a fixer: they are out there, and they are extremely stable too. > > Also a good chance to finally take a look at code that has been rotting in > a hard drive for too much time. > All of that takes time though. I have 6,787 short opening tags found. Even if I use a fixer to generate a diff, or, to fix them and then examine the diff in a pull request... that's going to take a LOT of time. It's going to start getting messy if I find false positives and need to exclude changes. It still doesn't address the impact of changes that aren't found. Are you 100% positive that the fixers out there will catch EVERY single instance? php-cs-fixer doesn't update <? inside of strings. If that's generating dynamic code, then that's not getting caught. The output from php-cs-fixer just generated a diff file that was 161,000 lines long. But yea, that's something I can scan through real quick and make sure nothing is going to get broken. No chance I'll miss something either. I would LOVE to have the time to go through our legacy code and clean out old stuff. We have a lot of technical debt that, while we aren't paying it off at the moment, it's gaining any interest either. We also have plenty that is. It's tough to justify putting off the stuff that is gaining interest to focus on stuff that isn't so we can fix short tags. I don't work for a software company. I develop an internal application for a non-software company. There are 2 other developers and enough work for 10 developers. It's going to be VERY hard for me to get management to approve putting off projects that have a direct impact on our business in order to upgrade to PHP 8 when that time comes. I think you are going to find that's a pretty common occurrence, and the adoption rate of PHP 8 is going to be VERY low. Especially when more and more user-friendly alternatives like python and node are coming along. It was one thing when the options were RoR, ASP.NET, and JSP. That's not the ecosystem anymore, and it's only going to provide additional user friendly opportunities in the next couple of years leading up to PHP8. Can someone PLEASE tell me the positive gains this RFC will accomplish that justifies risking: 1.) Losing market share 2.) losing credibility 3.) removing a large number of libraries that are fine from a technical aspect, but will stop working due to the existence of <? 4.) new security risks (code leaks that are more likely than the code leaks the RFC seeks to prevent) And, please don't use the existence of code fixers to justify this unless you are willing to demonstrate how it's quick and easy to go through a 161,000 line diff file or are willing to 100% guarantee that the fixer will not break anything, will not fix anything it shouldn't, and will not miss anything it should fix. -- Chase Peeler chasepee...@gmail.com
