On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 10:42 +0100, Pierre Joye wrote:
> Agreed on the contributions process, however:
>
> Ivan is talking about specifications, an implementation follows a
> given specification, not the other way 'round. A well written
> specification greatly simplify documentations, implementation(s) and
> testing, to name only a few advantages.
Yes, that's what we do in RFCs. I won't stop anybody from consolidating
a base specification, but as everything in this volunteer driven project
this depends from people actually doing this, not from meta discussions.
Also as long as PHP is the PHP reference implementation all things have
to be implemented there to be part of the language.
> That being said, I find very disturbing the total lack of interest
> from historical (from a time pov, not activity) core developers in the
> next major version. Most drastic changes around PHP happen outside
> PHP, many features our users are looking for are implemented outside
> the core while we keep arguing about the needs of these features. This
> is not a good thing.
In my opinion it is a good thing that PHP is powerful enough to enable
frameworks etc. to innovate around the core language. The core language
has to be a reliable and stable.
johannes