Re: [DECLINED] match expression RFC

Hi Kralle > Whether or not your new RFC qualifies for the second part of this is > rule, I can't tell as its left vaguely defined and I can't recall it > being used besides the scalar type hints RFCs. Perhaps someone smarter > than me can phrase this better. The docs say the following: > The author(s) make substantial changes to the proposal. While it's impossible > to put clear definitions on what constitutes 'substantial' changes, they should > be material enough so that they'll significantly affect the outcome of another > vote. The feedback was almost exclusively limited to two things (the new draft addresses both): * Blocks should be removed * The RFC wasn't discussed extensively enough My suggestion: I'll finish the draft and announce it in a few days. This will make it easier to judge if enough changes were made. If not I'll postpone the RFC for six months. Ilija