Re: RFC Proposal - static modifier for classes

On 20 November 2023 08:35:15 GMT, Lanre Waju <lanre@online-presence.ca> wrote: >1. I will personally implement this feature. That's good to hear, but the initial implementation is not the main cost of a new feature. Once we add something, it's very hard to remove, and every future change has to consider that feature and make sure it doesn't break. That's why "do we need X when Y does nearly the same thing" is a more valid argument (in general) than you're giving it credit for: if we included every variation of every feature, the language and its implementation would become unmanageably complex, so we have to choose where to draw the line. It's up to the person proposing a feature to persuade others that it falls the right side of that line - that the benefit of the feature outweighs the cost of having it in the language. (It's also worth noting that the previous proposal also had an implementation, linked at the bottom of the RFC.) It's probably not productive to just say "the people who voted last time are wrong", but it was long enough ago that a new RFC on the topic wouldn't break any rules. So, if you want to proceed with this, you can try to come up with a justification that addresses the points raised previously, and follow the process here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/howto Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]