On 15-6-2023 5:47, Levi Morrison via internals wrote:
Hello, PHP Internals,
I am moving my RFC for interface default methods to discussion:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/interface-default-methods.
This can be a useful tool for a few reasons:
1. It can make implementing an interface easier when cer
Hello, PHP Internals,
I am moving my RFC for interface default methods to discussion:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/interface-default-methods.
This can be a useful tool for a few reasons:
1. It can make implementing an interface easier when certain methods
can be implemented by other methods in the i
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 4:06 AM Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, Nicolas Grekas wrote:
>
> > > I'm going to nitpick on the newly suggested names and argument order for
> > > the
> > > DatePeriod factory methods — althoughI do agree that they need to get
> > > created:
> > >
> > > cre
On 14/06/2023 22:51, Máté Kocsis wrote:
The whole discussion about also deprecating the other one started only
because of improving naming:
it is also a nice thing to pursue but fails the cost-benefit analysis.
In my mind, making two new names, both unambiguous, gives a greater
benefit (a cle
>
> Given that you've agreed that neither signature is "primary" or "better",
> doesn't that argument apply equally to both signatures? If it's OK to force
> anyone using individual callbacks to change their code, why is it not
> equally OK to force anyone using an object to change their code?
>
A
Hey Nicolas,
Instead of passing arguments to __clone(), I wondered about a new
> __clone_with(array
> $properties) that could be implemented next to __clone(), with the
> following behavior:
>
>- if only __clone is implemented, same behavior as always
>- if __clone_with is implemented, __c
Hi all,
I'm running into something which peaked my curiousity due to its
unexpected behaviour, so I'm writing to the list in the hopes of finding
out whether this is by design, a bug or an oversight which should be
fixed (via an RFC?).
> The precedence order is that members from the current
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 at 15:49, Máté Kocsis wrote:
> I understand that communication is much simpler with your suggested
> approach, however, deprecating something which everyone surely uses partly
> undermines the efforts we have made for ensuring as much backward
> compatibility as reasonably pos
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 at 01:41, Vinicius Dias wrote:
> Hello, folks. I hope you all are well.
>
> I was talking to friend about a feature I would like to see in PHP but
> I mentioned that unfortunately I do not have the knowledge to try
> implementing it myself, since it is not something very simpl
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, Nicolas Grekas wrote:
> > I'm going to nitpick on the newly suggested names and argument order for
> > the
> > DatePeriod factory methods — althoughI do agree that they need to get
> > created:
> >
> > createFromInterval(DateTimeInterface $start, DateInterval $interval,
> > Da
thanks for the thumbs up and morrisonlevi's review, it's appreciated.
still needs a maintainer/core-dev approval though.
btw the old file() flags check was actually flawed and would miss some
incorrect flags, for example `flags = 10` aka `flags= (1 << 1) | (1
<< 3)` is, and always was, incorrect
Hi
I just opened the vote for the "Marking overridden methods
(#[\Override])" RFC. The RFC contains a single vote that requires a 2/3
majority to pass. Voting runs 2 weeks until 2023-06-28 08:30 UTC.
Please find the following resources for your references:
RFC Text: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/mar
Hi Vinicius,
What would be the reason to add this? A reason cannot just be that there is
no such function. You can easily do it with a loop like you have just
shown. There isn't really any other way unless we introduce some driver
specific SQL builder. So what would we gain from it? Is it speed, s
13 matches
Mail list logo
