Re: int|float for sleep? sleep(0.1) => sleep 0.1 seconds
| From: | Larry Garfield | Date: | Tue, 05 Mar 2024 17:43:04 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: int|float for sleep? sleep(0.1) => sleep 0.1 seconds | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-122572@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024, at 1:09 PM, Hans Henrik Bergan wrote:
> Voting has now been simplified to 3x no/php 8.4/php 9.0 questions.
> (I actually would've preferred the original 6, would have been
> unambiguous if people are supposed to checkbox only 8.4 or both 8.4
> and 9.0, and would have been easier to see the % of people who voted
> only 9.0, I think. But I don't care enough about it to actually fight
> for it, and multiple people requested it be reduced to 3, so let's go
> with that :) )
>
>>That said, thanks for making this, it's something I'd like to see in PHP as well.
>
> Happy to hear it :)
>
>
>> - Instead of using backticks, use
>>
<php>sleep()</php> for inline and
> <PHP>…</PHP> for multi-line snippets. This comes
> with syntax
> highlighting and documentation links.
>>(...)
>> - It would help readability if you'd use additional headlines for each
> of the three sub-proposals within the Proposal section.
>>
>
> I don't want to spend too much effort on nitpicks, but if someone
> volunteers to improve it, I'd be happy to add it, in which case please
> send a PR to
>
> https://github.com/divinity76/stuff/blob/phprfc/2024/sleep_function_float_support.md
>
>> For (2) it would help if you'd explain what it means for sleep() to be
> interrupted and how this can happen. I believe this is signal-handling
> related, but writing it out explicitly for the folks that didn't yet
> encounter it would probably make sense.
>
> I'm not an expert, but when researching this on Windows 10 + PHP 8.3.2,
> I couldn't actually get it to return 192. (nor return anything except 0):
> - When sending a WM_CLOSE message (equivalent to `taskkill /IM
> php.exe`), it was just completely ignored: PHP kept sleeping.
> - When doing a TerminateProcess() call (equivalent to `taskkill /IM
> php.exe /F`), PHP was just terminated, sleep never returned.
> - When sending a CTRL_C_EVENT (equivalent to ctrl+C), PHP just
> terminated, sleep never returned.
> - When sending a CTRL_BREAK_EVENT (equivalent to ctrl+Break), PHP just
> terminated, sleep never returned.
>
> I don't know how to make it return 192 on Windows.. Anyone know?
>
>>For the "Unaffected PHP Functionality" you could just spell out that anything that
>>is not the sleep() function will be unaffected
>
> meh, someone else pointed out that the irrelevant sections could be
> removed, I removed the "Unaffected PHP Functionality" section (along
> with 2-3 others)
>
>> I'd just put a single "Do all of this in the next minor" vote there. All
>>of the suggested improvements make sense to me and the breaking changes
>>are mostly theoretical.
>
> meh, I don't want to risk the RFC getting rejected because too many
> people thought it should be done in next.major instead of next.minor,
> let's keep both next.minor + next.major vote options. (You're probably
> right, I predict a majority vote for next.minor for all 3, but i'll
> keep the vote options just in case.)
A 3 way up-down vote doesn't make sense. What happens if none of the 3 options reaches 66%?
The viable options here are a single RCV vote (which we've done before), or a single
"Should we do this" vote that requires 66%, followed by a "when should we do
this" vote with 2 options, majority wins.
--Larry Garfield