Normally every code base has old and new code, some is actively maintained, 
some is probably third-party maintained, some is unmaintained. Business 
normally not calculates costs for upgrading, securing, GDPRing old code, so 
bigger changes always leave some people behind.
I would prefer to write new code with sth like declare(strict_variables=1); or 
declare(SomeNamespace\Foo:strict_variables=1); That way, people can write new 
code in a better way, include new libraries and upgrade old code piece by piece 
without any big pressure.

Regards
Thomas

> Matthew Brown <matthewmatt...@gmail.com> hat am 28. August 2019 um 17:32 
> geschrieben:
> 
> 
> It's essentially tech debt, and the language has allowed its users to
> accrue a ton of it.
> 
> The longer that's allowed (deprecations/warnings prolong the issue in my
> opinion) the harder it will be to fix the issues.
> 
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 at 10:56, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 28 August 2019 15:22:22 BST, Matthew Brown <matthewmatt...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >Looking at our notice logs, I estimate (fairly roughly) that it would
> > >require about a week's worth of my time to fix these issues
> > I honestly thought you were posting that as an argument against. A week of
> > resource (plus the accompanying QA impact etc) is a significant investment
> > for many organisations. That's why it has the potential to delay adoption
> > of a new version, and why a long lead-in via deprecation or opt-in is
> > necessary.
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Rowan Collins
> > [IMSoP]
> > --
> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> >

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

Reply via email to