| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |
| rfc:p-plus-plus [2019/08/14 20:59] – Fix the many factual errors in the preface for this informal vote. zeev | rfc:p-plus-plus [2019/08/15 08:52] (current) – old revision restored (2019/08/14 15:04) nikic |
|---|
| ====== Poll: Feasibility of P++ ====== | ====== Poll: Feasibility of P++ ====== |
| * Version: 0.2 | * Version: 0.1 |
| * Date: 2019-08-14 | * Date: 2019-08-14 |
| * Author: Derick, derick@php.net | * Author: Derick, derick@php.net |
| * Auditor: Zeev, zeev@php.net | |
| * First Published at: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/p-plus-plus | * First Published at: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/p-plus-plus |
| |
| ===== Introduction ===== | ===== Introduction ===== |
| | There are continuous arguments whether the PHP project should do everything to preserve backwards compatibility, or continue to add features to make PHP a more modern language, with as an example enhanced stricter type-safety. |
| |
| | Several suggestions have been made to address this perceived split. One of them is creating a newly branded "P++" to put all the new features into, and perhaps go the more "strict way", while continuing to maintain "PHP" without making this original version change at all. As it takes time, attention, and resources, to see whether such a direction is feasible, it makes sense to find out whether the general internals community thinks it is a worthwhile endeavour. |
| There are continuous arguments whether the PHP project <del>should do everything to preserve</del>//properly justify every backwards compatibility break//, as well as continue to add //new as well as change existing// features to make PHP a <del>more modern</del> //stricter language//<del>, with as an example enhanced stricter type-safety</del>. | |
| | |
| Several suggestions have been made to address this perceived split. One of them is creating a newly branded "P++" to put <del>all the new </del> strictness-related features into <del>, and perhaps go the more "strict way"</del>, while continuing to maintain "PHP" <del>without making this original version change at all</del> //as dynamic as it is today//. As it takes time, attention, and resources, to see whether such a direction is feasible, it makes sense to find out whether the general internals community thinks it is a worthwhile endeavour. | |
| |
| ===== Proposal ===== | ===== Proposal ===== |
| The proposal in this <del>RFC</del> //informal, non-binding vote// is a simple poll to see whether "P++" (supporting two distinct <del>languages</del> //dialects// with different dynamic vs. strict handling) //on top of a single, unified runtime// is a direction that people want to commit to spending the project’s time and energy to explore //at this time//. | The proposal in this RFC is a simple poll to see whether "P++" (supporting two distinct languages with different dynamic vs. strict handling) is a direction that people want to commit to spending the project’s time and energy to explore. |
| |
| ===== Vote ===== | ===== Vote ===== |