Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP JIT or AOT

It's Monday morning, maybe I'm misunderstanding ... > we must already know where it's called from, so we should also know the types of passed arguments, then we may eliminate checks at all We'll always know the types of arguments at the call site surely ? It's knowing the types at the location be

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP JIT or AOT

> I would be glad, if later we'll combine our experience and work on JIT/AOT together. This is obviously something I look forward too :) Cheers Joe On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Joe Watkins wrote: > It's Monday morning, maybe I'm misunderstanding ... > > > we must already know where it's ca

Re: [PHP-DEV] Spaceship operator RFC

Hi Stas, On 16/02/2015 06:20, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: Since Andrea has withdrawn the spaceship operator RFC (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/combined-comparison-operator), I'd like to resurrect it. Looks like by vote results (with 1 day of official vote left) it was clearly passing, so are there any

Re: [PHP-DEV] I quit.

On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 09:21:14PM +, Andrea Faulds wrote: > Hi everyone, > > For my own reasons, I have decided to cease my involvement with PHP > development. This isn’t a judgement of the PHP community nor the internals > mailing list, you’re all wonderful people and it’s really been a pl

Re: [PHP-DEV] Spaceship operator RFC

Hi! > About your question, I don't know... treating a cancelled voting result > as if it wasn't might be setting a weird precedent, even though it was > so close to the end and had an overwhelming majority. The only reason it was cancelled because of Andrea quitting, and with one day left result

Re: [PHP-DEV] I quit.

2015.02.16. 8:12 ezt írta ("Netroby" ): > > May be leave for a while can let she happier than before. Do not censure her What do you mean?

Re: [PHP-DEV] Spaceship operator RFC

Hi Stas! About your question, I don't know... treating a cancelled voting result as if it wasn't might be setting a weird precedent, even though it was so close to the end and had an overwhelming majority. The only reason it was cancelled because of Andrea quitting, and with one day left resul

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP JIT or AOT

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Joe Watkins wrote: > It's Monday morning, maybe I'm misunderstanding ... > may be I'm too :) > > > we must already know where it's called from, so we should also know the > types of passed arguments, then we may eliminate checks at all > > We'll always know th

[PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

Morning internals, I've had mostly negative feedback on the design-by-contract idea, maybe it's a step too far. The expectations RFC in its current form proposes that we introduce zero-cost assertions, which are compatible with the current assertion API. Since this has been in discus

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

Hi Joe, On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Joe Watkins wrote: > I've had mostly negative feedback on the design-by-contract idea, maybe > it's a step too far. > I think introducing strict type safety for DbC like static/compiled languages is too far. I agree. The expectations RFC in its

RE: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

> -Original Message- > From: yohg...@gmail.com [mailto:yohg...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yasuo > Ohgaki > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 11:45 AM > To: Joe Watkins > Cc: PHP internals > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations > > Hi Joe, > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Joe Watkins > w

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [PRE-VOTE] Remove the date.timezone warning

On Mon, 16 Feb 2015, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Stanislav Malyshev > wrote: > > > > Are you sure that "the ini file is created by the package > > > maintainer and it includes the “date.timezone” setting" is true? > > > Last time I checked it > > > > I my experience,

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

On 16.02.15 10:37, Joe Watkins wrote: > Please review the RFC, and provide feedback, if there are no strong > objections we will go ahead with a vote when the patch is ready, in the > coming days. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/expectations I like it. But why do those two INI settings use d

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

Hi Martin, On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Martin Jansen wrote: > On 16.02.15 10:37, Joe Watkins wrote: > > Please review the RFC, and provide feedback, if there are no strong > > objections we will go ahead with a vote when the patch is ready, in the > > coming days. > > > > https://wi

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Exceptions in the engine

"Rowan Collins" wrote in message news:54e12349.7070...@gmail.com... On 14/02/2015 00:09, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: Hi Nikita, On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: As such I'm re-proposing this RFC for inclusion in PHP 7: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/engine_exceptions_for_php7

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

Hi Joe, is there any penalty of catch-AssertionException-blocks? Are those eliminated in production code? Thanks -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Joe Watkins wrote: > Morning internals, > > I've had mostly negative feedback on the design-by-contract idea, maybe > it's a step too far. > > The expectations RFC in its current form proposes that we introduce > zero-cost assertions, which are compatible

RE: [PHP-DEV] Spaceship operator RFC

Hi Stas, > De : Stanislav Malyshev > > > Since Andrea has withdrawn the spaceship operator RFC > > (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/combined-comparison-operator), I'd like to > > resurrect it. Looks like by vote results (with 1 day of official vote > > left) it was clearly passing, so are there any objec

Re: [PHP-DEV] Remove $this from incompatible context

Stanislav Malyshev wrote on 16/02/2015 05:14: Hi! Agreed. Personally, I'm a great fan of symettry, so part of me would prefer to introduce a keyword for when you *can't* call a method statically, e.g. "instance function foo() { ... }". But I guess instance This would be another form of saying

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

> is there any penalty of catch-AssertionException-blocks? Are those eliminated in production code? Assertions should never be enabled in production code, the ability to catch (and enable by configuration) the exception serves the developer of the code during development only. The example code is

Re: [PHP-DEV] A modest proposal: __contructStatic

Kris Craig wrote on 16/02/2015 01:40: > create the static instance Isn't that essentially a contradiction in terms? I can't help but feel that blurring the line between static and non-static classes/methods would cause more harm than good. I've never really done any work with Redis before s

RE: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Scalar Type Hints

> De : Netroby [mailto:hufeng1...@gmail.com] > > We do not have Scalar type hints for years. we code in php for years > without any type check. it's ok. not the primary things. > > Look at other dynamic programming language, they may not have the type > check either. > > It is ok, and it is fine.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Exceptions in the engine

Tony Marston wrote on 16/02/2015 10:09: This RFC only mentions errors with object methods, so what impact would it have with procedural functions. For example, if fopen('nonexistantfile.txt') fails the return value is FALSE and an E_WARNING is generated, but it is difficult to trap the error me

Re: [PHP-DEV] Spaceship operator RFC

Hi! > Reopen it for one day. It's quite crazy but it does not create a > precedent. Andrea said she gave the RFC to anyone wishing to go on > with it. If you officially take over the RFC, you are the owner, you > can do that. OK, I've put it back to vote for a day. Will close it tomorrow. -- St

[PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

hi, During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" we got an idea of using annotations. BTW: annotations are useful by their own and may be used for different purposes. Support for annotations was proposed long time ago: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/annotations https://wiki

Re: [PHP-DEV] I quit.

François Laupretre wrote on 15/02/2015 23:23: De : Andrea Faulds [mailto:a...@ajf.me] So, thank you, PHP community. It has been a wonderful 2 years. That's very sad, but I understand it had gone too far. You're more important than any software project, take care of yourself. Unfortunately, th

[PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

I decided to explain the proposed annotation syntax "in words" to avoid misunderstanding annotations ::= { annotation }. annotation ::= '<' STRING '>' | '<' STRING '(' expr ')' '>'. where is regular PHP expression. Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > hi

Re: [PHP-DEV] Spaceship operator RFC

Le 16/02/2015 11:58, Stanislav Malyshev a écrit : Hi! Reopen it for one day. It's quite crazy but it does not create a precedent. Andrea said she gave the RFC to anyone wishing to go on with it. If you officially take over the RFC, you are the owner, you can do that. OK, I've put it back to

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

On 16/02/15 12:19, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > I decided to explain the proposed annotation syntax "in words" to avoid > misunderstanding > > annotations ::= { annotation }. > annotation ::= '<' STRING '>' | '<' STRING '(' expr ')' '>'. > > where is regular PHP expression. Why not doc-block annotati

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

you already have doc-block. nothing should be done in PHP core, but you have to parse it yourself. The goal of annotations is to provide standard and powerful way. On the other hand standard PHP expression syntax may be not enough for all cases. Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Ce

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

On 16/02/15 12:32, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > you already have doc-block. nothing should be done in PHP core, but > you have to parse it yourself. > The goal of annotations is to provide standard and powerful way. > On the other hand standard PHP expression syntax may be not enough for > all cases. A

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > hi, > > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" we > got an idea of using annotations. > > BTW: annotations are useful by their own and may be used for different > purposes. Support for annotations was propo

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

yes. like it was proposed at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reflection_doccomment_annotations#list_of_methods_to_implement Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Cesar Rodas wrote: > > On 16/02/15 12:32, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > > you already have doc-block. nothing should be done in PHP cor

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

On 16/02/15 12:36, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > yes. like it was proposed at > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reflection_doccomment_annotations#list_of_methods_to_implement Awesome. I would +1 for sure! Cheers, > > Thanks. Dmitry. > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Cesar Rodas > w

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

the idea to not evaluate non-constant expressions at all, but just keep AST and provide interface to read it. PHP extensions should be able to use them as they like. (evaluate or insert into AST of function(s), etc). Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > the idea to not evaluate non-constant expressions at all, but just keep > AST and provide interface to read it. > PHP extensions should be able to use them as they like. (evaluate or > insert into AST of function(s), etc). > Ok so this wou

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

yeah, it was a typo, that I fixed in first place, but not in the output On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > >> the idea to not evaluate non-constant expressions at all, but just keep >> AST and provide interface

[PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

2015-02-16 14:19 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Stogov : > annotations ::= { annotation }. > annotation ::= '<' STRING '>' | '<' STRING '(' expr ')' '>'. > > where is regular PHP expression. Hello! Really like this syntax, actually you steal my thoughts )) I want to call this metadata, not an annotations

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

2015-02-16 14:42 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Stogov : > the idea to not evaluate non-constant expressions at all, but just keep > AST and provide interface to read it. > PHP extensions should be able to use them as they like. (evaluate or > insert into AST of function(s), etc). > > Thanks. Dmitry. It's a

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Alexander Lisachenko < lisachenko...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2015-02-16 14:42 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Stogov : > >> the idea to not evaluate non-constant expressions at all, but just keep >> AST and provide interface to read it. >> PHP extensions should be able to use them

[PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > hi, > > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" > we got an idea of using annotations. > > BTW: annotations are useful by their own and may be used for different > purposes. Support for annotations was propo

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

2015-02-16 15:12 GMT+03:00 Benjamin Eberlei : > but what is the API of an AST node and how does the visitor look like? I have a draft for that: https://gist.github.com/lisachenko/ffcfdec4c46e01864b33 This is extended version for php-ast extension that I want to propose for PHP.

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > hi, > > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" we > got an idea of using annotations. > > BTW: annotations are useful by their own and may be used for different > purposes. Support for annotations was propos

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

Hi, Am 16.02.2015 um 12:07 schrieb Dmitry Stogov: > HHVM already implemented similar concept > > http://docs.hhvm.com/manual/en/hack.attributes.php Why not borrow their syntax? Makes it easier to write stuff for both languages. Greets, Dennis -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing

RE: [PHP-DEV] I quit.

> De : Rowan Collins [mailto:rowan.coll...@gmail.com] > > Please can we take Andrea at her word: > > > This isn’t a judgement of the PHP community nor the internals mailing > list, you’re all wonderful people and it’s really been a pleasure, and I > mean that completely honestly. > > If people w

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Alexander Lisachenko < lisachenko...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2015-02-16 15:12 GMT+03:00 Benjamin Eberlei : > >> but what is the API of an AST node and how does the visitor look like? > > > > I have a draft for that: > https://gist.github.com/lisachenko/ffcfdec4c46e01

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Pavel Kouřil wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > > hi, > > > > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" > we > > got an idea of using annotations. > > > > BTW: annotations are useful by their own and m

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

2015-02-16 15:31 GMT+03:00 Benjamin Eberlei : > > My question is how do i evaluate this at runtime? I suppose a function is > necessary like evaluate_ast(...), but that requires passing the context. > many many open questions and as nikic points out this should probably be > delayed to 7.1 becaus

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On 16/02/15 13:40, Alexander Lisachenko wrote: > 2015-02-16 15:31 GMT+03:00 Benjamin Eberlei : > >> My question is how do i evaluate this at runtime? I suppose a function is >> necessary like evaluate_ast(...), but that requires passing the context. >> many many open questions and as nikic points

Re: [PHP-DEV] Spaceship operator RFC

Hi Stas, > On 16 Feb 2015, at 05:20, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > Since Andrea has withdrawn the spaceship operator RFC > (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/combined-comparison-operator), I'd like to > resurrect it. Looks like by vote results (with 1 day of official vote > left) it was clearly passing,

[PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

The implementation is not going to be simple, and taking in account other tasks, it may be difficult to provide high-quality implementation. Lets look if it's really a desirable feature. Then I may do all my best, or forget about it by 7.1. Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Nikita

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

our approach is more powerfull, and HHVM syntax is not sufficient. Also looks better than <>. anyway, syntax decorators are discussable. Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Dennis Birkholz wrote: > Hi, > > Am 16.02.2015 um 12:07 schrieb Dmitry Stogov: > > HHVM already implemented

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

We don't have final design yet. just idea(s) and a question - should we try to do it for PHP7 or later or not at all. Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Cesar Rodas wrote: > > On 16/02/15 13:40, Alexander Lisachenko wrote: > > 2015-02-16 15:31 GMT+03:00 Benjamin Eberlei : > > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] I quit.

François Laupretre wrote on 16/02/2015 12:27: De : Rowan Collins [mailto:rowan.coll...@gmail.com] Please can we take Andrea at her word: > This isn’t a judgement of the PHP community nor the internals mailing list, you’re all wonderful people and it’s really been a pleasure, and I mean that c

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On 16/02/15 14:00, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > We don't have final design yet. just idea(s) and a question - should we try > to do it for PHP7 or later or not at all. That is awesome. I would vote for a yes and I'd like it out ASAP (I would adapt my own annotation parser to read *also* this annotation

Re: [PHP-DEV] Spaceship operator RFC

Hi! > One thing of note is that I didn’t write a language specification > patch. If you’re to pick it up, I guess you’d have to do that at some > point, sorry about that. No problem, I'll take care of it, thanks for the reminder. -- Stas Malyshev smalys...@gmail.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Run

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP JIT or AOT

Dmitry and Joe, On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Anthony Ferrara > wrote: >> Well, if you know the destination function at compile time, you don't >> need to generate generic code. you can generate a direct dispatch >> (asm-level funct

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP JIT or AOT

> > The type checks in PHP7 is quite cheap (2-3 CPU instructions). Strict or > > weak check doesn't make any difference for "fast path" (the same 2-3 > > instructions). The slow patch for weak checks is going to be a bit more > > expensive. > > Well, not really. It's 2-3 CPU instructions once you h

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP JIT or AOT

Dmitry, On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > >> > The type checks in PHP7 is quite cheap (2-3 CPU instructions). Strict or >> > weak check doesn't make any difference for "fast path" (the same 2-3 >> > instructions). The slow patch for weak checks is going to be a bit more >> >

Re: [PHP-DEV] I quit.

You're right. I am probably expressing my own frustration when I imagine that withdrawing four important RFC s a few days before vote ends has little to do with time management issues. Let's stay politically correct and don't express anything about the atmosphere in the community, which has no

Re: [PHP-DEV] I quit.

The 0.1 RFC version was mentioned a lot as a good compromise by many people and had major support. Maybe someone competent could pick it up, make necessary adjustments that where required and let people vote on it? Start with small steps - get the weak type hints into the language first, see how it

[PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > hi, > > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" we > got an idea of using annotations. Thanks a lot to push that forward! > BTW: annotations are useful by their own and may be used for different > purposes.

[PHP-DEV] Re: I quit.

> The 0.1 RFC version was mentioned a lot as a good compromise by many > people and had major support. People keep saying this like it's a thing, but I and others are vehemently opposed to this as a solution. The only thing weak hints accomplishes is the illusion of safety without actually providi

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: I quit.

> -Original Message- > From: rdlow...@gmail.com [mailto:rdlow...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of > Daniel Lowrey > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 5:13 PM > To: internals@lists.php.net > Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: I quit. > > > The 0.1 RFC version was mentioned a lot as a good compromise by many > > pe

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: I quit.

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > From: rdlow...@gmail.com [mailto:rdlow...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of > > Daniel Lowrey > > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 5:13 PM > > To: internals@lists.php.net > > Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: I quit. > > > > > Th

[PHP-DEV] Proposing [constructive] solutions (was: I quit)

> De : Rowan Collins [mailto:rowan.coll...@gmail.com] > > Saying "that's enough" isn't even a productive comment. Enough what? > What is it you are asking to happen next? Maybe an initiative to write an RFC about the rules we should follow when writing to the list. People who agree could show the

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

Nikita Popov wrote on 16/02/2015 12:14: I think this is a great idea, but we should postpone it to PHP 7.1. Especially if you want to make this AST based (which would require both stabilizing the AST we return for expressions and having APIs to do codegen based on the AST) it will require a lot o

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Expectations

Hi Nikita, it looks like a part of old implementation is not trivial with new AST compiler. previously we translated assert(condition) into assert(condition, "assert(condition)"). actually we just captured a part of input buffer and added missing string argument. Is there a simple way to do the

Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposing [constructive] solutions (was: I quit)

On 16/02/15 15:31, François Laupretre wrote: >> - There is a lack of expertise at the core level of the code, so >> > collaboration on each feature is low. RFCs tend to have a single >> > sponsor, who has to see the whole process through to the end. > - One thing we can encourage, while indirect in

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP JIT or AOT

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Dmitry, > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > > > >> > The type checks in PHP7 is quite cheap (2-3 CPU instructions). Strict > or > >> > weak check doesn't make any difference for "fast path" (the same 2-3 > >> > ins

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: I quit.

2015-02-16 17:26 GMT+02:00 Daniel Lowrey : > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote: > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: rdlow...@gmail.com [mailto:rdlow...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of > > > Daniel Lowrey > > > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 5:13 PM > > > To: internals@lis

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

this will work, of course, and robust implementation wouldn't take more than a day :) but it'll require user-level parser again. no big advantage in comparison to doc-block. Thanks. Dmitry. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Rowan Collins wrote: > Nikita Popov wrote on 16/02/2015 12:14: > >> I

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: I quit.

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote: > This bickering already jeopardized the type hinting RFC's how many times? 3 as I recall? Zeev was kind enough to reach out privately prior to your message and we began exchanged mails trying to better understand each other's point of view

Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposing [constructive] solutions (was: I quit)

On Mon, 2015-02-16 at 16:31 +0100, François Laupretre wrote: > > De : Rowan Collins [mailto:rowan.coll...@gmail.com] > > > > Saying "that's enough" isn't even a productive comment. Enough what? > > What is it you are asking to happen next? > > Maybe an initiative to write an RFC about the rules we

[PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints

Hi, > > De : Arvids Godjuks [mailto:arvids.godj...@gmail.com] > > The 0.1 RFC version was mentioned a lot as a good compromise by many > people > and had major support. > Maybe someone competent could pick it up, make necessary adjustments > that > where required and let people vote on it? Start w

Re: [PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints

On 16 February 2015 at 16:42, François Laupretre wrote: > Hi, > > > > De : Arvids Godjuks [mailto:arvids.godj...@gmail.com] > > > > The 0.1 RFC version was mentioned a lot as a good compromise by many > > people > > and had major support. > > Maybe someone competent could pick it up, make necessa

[PHP-DEV] Re: Reviving scalar type hints

2015-02-16 18:42 GMT+02:00 François Laupretre : > Hi, > > > > De : Arvids Godjuks [mailto:arvids.godj...@gmail.com] > > > > The 0.1 RFC version was mentioned a lot as a good compromise by many > > people > > and had major support. > > Maybe someone competent could pick it up, make necessary adjust

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Rowan Collins > wrote: Is there any value in deciding the initial syntax for 7.0, and implementing only non-parameterised annotations, i.e. you can call hasAnnotation(string): bool but nothing else? Dmitry Stogov wrote on

[PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

Hi! > The test there is self explainable. Of course, annotations just provide > a way to add metadata, but doesn't define attribute names or the ways > they are going to be used. Only Reflection API to read. Looks fine, but I'm not sure how one can use the AST that the reflection returns. Is it f

[PHP-DEV] Done something wrong ...

I've synced with current git and seem to have the files I expect for interbase, but when trying to run a clean build of the core stuff it no longer compiles ... For example /srv/repo/php-src_master/ext/opcache/ZendAccelerator.c:2005:19: error: ‘zend_array’ has no member named ‘pDestructor’ Seems t

[PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Remove the date.timezone warning

As announced yesterday, I put the RFC into vote now. Voting period is 8 days, it will end 24th of February. The RFC is here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/date.timezone_warning_removal I also slightly reworded the feedback section in reply to t

Re: [PHP-DEV] Done something wrong ...

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Lester Caine wrote: > I've synced with current git and seem to have the files I expect for > interbase, but when trying to run a clean build of the core stuff it no > longer compiles ... > > For example > /srv/repo/php-src_master/ext/opcache/ZendAccelerator.c:2005

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

this won't implement features necessary for phpDocumentor, Doctrine, etc. On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Rowan Collins wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Rowan Collins > wrote: > >Is there any value in deciding the initial syntax for 7.0, and >i

[PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > The test there is self explainable. Of course, annotations just provide > > a way to add metadata, but doesn't define attribute names or the ways > > they are going to be used. Only Reflection API to read. > > Looks fine, but

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: I quit.

Am Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:00:41 +0200 schrieb Arvids Godjuks : Hallo, > Right now we need a breakthrough event - get type hints into the language > at all. The most sensible thing to do it is to add basic type hints that > work like the current conversion rules, maybe add some notices/warnings for >

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

Dmitry Stogov wrote on 16/02/2015 18:41: this won't implement features necessary for phpDocumentor, Doctrine, etc. I know. Like I say, it's just a way of keeping things moving, rather than saying "eh, maybe next year". It allows us to formally agree the feature, the roadmap, the basic synt

Re: [PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 7:42 PM, François Laupretre wrote: > Hi, > > > > De : Arvids Godjuks [mailto:arvids.godj...@gmail.com] > > > > The 0.1 RFC version was mentioned a lot as a good compromise by many > > people > > and had major support. > > Maybe someone competent could pick it up, make nece

Re: [PHP-DEV] filter_var doesn't support international email addresses

Rowan, thanks for your response. Wow that regex is pretty intense. A new filter type sounds like a reasonable idea to me. I'm not sure if I'll be able to offer any improvements myself (although I will look into it shortly here). I I do know that Google announced last August that they plan to suppo

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Pavel Kouřil wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: >> > hi, >> > >> > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" >> > we >> > got an idea of

Re: [PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 5:42 PM, François Laupretre wrote: > Hi, > > - the fact that the RFC supports single types only, like the previous 'return > type' RFC. While it is easier to implement, it opens several issues as > multiply-typed arguments are an integral part of the PHP language (mostly

Re: [PHP-DEV] Done something wrong ...

On 16/02/15 18:34, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Lester Caine wrote: > >> I've synced with current git and seem to have the files I expect for >> interbase, but when trying to run a clean build of the core stuff it no >> longer compiles ... >> >> For example >> /srv/repo

Re: [PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 9:42 AM, François Laupretre wrote: > Hi, >> >> De : Arvids Godjuks [mailto:arvids.godj...@gmail.com] >> >> The 0.1 RFC version was mentioned a lot as a good compromise by many >> people >> and had major support. >> Maybe someone competent could pick it up, make necessary ad

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, 16 Feb 2015, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > hi, > > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" we > got an idea of using annotations. > > BTW: annotations are useful by their own and may be used for different > purposes. Support for annotations was proposed long tim

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > hi, > > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" we > got an idea of using annotations. > > BTW: annotations are useful by their own and may be used for different > purposes. Support for annotations was propo

Re: [PHP-DEV] Done something wrong ...

On 16.02.15 20:46, Lester Caine wrote: > On 16/02/15 18:34, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Lester Caine wrote: >>> /srv/repo/php-src_master/ext/opcache/ZendAccelerator.c:2005:19: error: >>> ‘zend_array’ has no member named ‘pDestructor’ >>> Seems to be due to changes for

RE: [PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints

Hi, > De : morrison.l...@gmail.com [mailto:morrison.l...@gmail.com] De la part > > Also, I know people REALLY want scalar types in PHP 7.0 but honestly > all we need to do is reserve the keywords so there is no BC impact and > then we can do it at any point during the PHP 7 lifecycle. This is my

RE: [PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints

> De : Pavel Kouril [mailto:pajou...@gmail.com] > > Hello, > > I know this is probably a pretty unpopular opinion in PHP (based on > the replies I got in the other thread), but different values for > parameters should be IMHO solved by method overloading and such. The question is not that it's un

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 7:41 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > this won't implement features necessary for phpDocumentor, Doctrine, etc. > Just be careful here with phpDocumentor, it does not use annotations but really needs docblocks instead. Today the overlap between it and doctrine and such is just

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Derick Rethans wrote: > On Mon, 16 Feb 2015, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > > > hi, > > > > During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" > we > > got an idea of using annotations. > > > > BTW: annotations are useful by their own and may be use

Re: [PHP-DEV] Annotations in PHP7

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > >> hi, >> >> During discussion of different ways of implementing "Design by Contract" >> we >> got an idea of using annotations. >> >> BTW: annotations are useful by their own

  1   2   >