On Fri, 31 Jan 2014, Anatol Belski wrote:
> On Fri, January 31, 2014 01:38, Christopher Jones wrote:
> > A quick question: am I right to assume that because this vote has
> > widespread impact on PHP it needs 2/3 majority per
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/voting ?
> >
> > It's not totally clear that the change is covered by any of the
> > examples in the voting RFC, but I see the 64 bit project as
> > affecting the language as a whole (for better or worse!)
> >
> catching up on this now as this was delayed by the mail issues.
>
> I'm not a native speaker, however what i read here
>
> [QUOTE]
> We also need to ensure, as much as possible, that the decision isn't based
> on some arbitrary circumstances (such as a temporary marginal majority for
> a certain school of thought). For these reasons, a feature affecting the
> language itself (new syntax for example) will be considered as 'accepted'
> if it wins a 2/3 of the votes. Other RFCs require 50% + 1 votes to get
> 'accepted'.
> [/QUOTE]
>
> sounds for 50%+1, as it affects not the language itself (no syntax
> changes, etc.) but its implementation. Even in such an unusual case :)
I am not sure, but syntax is only given as an example there. And I would
argue that this is definitely a language change. Having a stable and
easy extension API has always been one of PHP's greatest strenghts,
especially in the early days where PHP was a very thin glue layer.
Actually, I would argue that PHP is *still* such a layer, even though
people write massive libraries and frameworks.
cheers,
Derick
--
http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org
Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php
twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
Posted with an email client that doesn't mangle email: alpine