A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://news.php.net/php.internals/66535 below:

[VOTE] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP distribution

Re: [VOTE] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP distribution 
Zeev,

As a rule of thumb, if the language syntax doesn’t change, it doesn’t need
> a 2/3 vote.
>
> How do I know?  I asked for this special majority in the first place.  It
> was designed to protect the language from becoming the kitchen sink of
> programming languages, not from making architectural progress.
>
>
>
> If we need to amend the original voting RFC text so that it’s clearer –
> let’s do that.  Right now it’s slightly ambiguous because it mentions
> ‘language syntax’ as an example, instead of outright saying that it’s about
> that, period.
>

Ambiguous writing is no excuse. People vote based on what is written, not
what was intended. Clarifying after the fact the intentions is not how RFCs
are designed to work. The point is that there's supposed to be clarity in
the text. And considering that the text is pretty clear that any change
affecting the language itself must have 2/3 majority, the question is not
what was intended by that statement, but if adopting ZO+ affects the
language (by interpretation).

So far, from what I've seen, you and Rasmus are the major people backing
the "this is not a language change" camp. In the other camp, there are
several people who have stood up and said that it does appear to be a
language change. I'm not trying to draw lines in the sand, but I'm trying
to point out that we have a disagreement that needs to be resolved.

Hand waving and saying "it's not what I meant by that line" shows nothing
but disrespect for the system and for everyone who participates in it...

So my proposal is to slow down for a minute and not call this RFC accepted
or not until we can come to some consensus as to if it classifies as a
language change or not... Better to clarify for the health of the project
than to plow through and risk causing further strife...

Anthony
Thread (112 messages)

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.3