Re: State of Generics and Collections

On Sun, Aug 25, 2024, at 22:28, Gina P. Banyard wrote: > On Friday, 23 August 2024 at 23:55, Rob Landers <rob@bottled.codes> wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2024, at 23:06, Larry Garfield wrote: >>> >>> With generics, the syntax isn't the hard part. The hard part is type inference, >>> or accepting that generic-using code will just be extraordinarily verbose and clumsy. There is (as >>> I understand from Arnaud, who again can correct me if I'm wrong) not a huge amount of >>> difference in effort between supporting only Foo<Bar> and supporting >>> Foo<Bar<Baz>>. The nesting isn't the hard part. The hard part is not having to >>> type Foo<Bar> 4 times across 2 files every time you do something with generics. If that can >>> be resolved satisfactorily (and performantly), then the road map to reified generics is reasonably >>> visible. >> >> Ok. But wasn't there something about nesting causing super-linear performance issues? >> So, disable nesting and don't worry about inference. >> [...] >> Ah, this is what I was thinking of. Thank you. Yeah, instead of "nesting" prior, >> I was referring to union types. > > Rob, with all the kindness I can give, please condense your emails to have a semblance of > sense. > This is not a bar where you are having a one on one conversation. > You are sending emails to thousands of people on a mailing list that can read you. > It would be appreciated if you could go over everything you read, digest the content, and then > form a reply. > Or at the minimum, if you realize that a previous remark you made does not apply, redraft the > email. > And possibly even sit on it for a bit before sending it, as you routinely come up with a point > you forgot to include in your email. > > Reading the mailing list is an exhausting task, especially when the volume is excessive. > As a reminder to everyone, we have rules: > https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/master/docs/mailinglist-rules.md > > However, in your case, please note the following rule: > >> If you notice that your posting ratio is much higher than that of other people, >> double-check the above rules. Try to wait a bit longer before sending your replies to give other >> people more time to digest your answers and more importantly give you the opportunity to make sure >> that you aggregate your current position into a single mail instead of multiple ones. > > For the past 2–3 months, you have sent the vast majority of emails on this list, this is not > what I would consider normal nor expected for your level of "seniority" (for the lack of > better word) on the project. > This is not to say to stop posting and replying, just to do it in a more conscious manner for > the rest of us reading you. > > Best regards, > > Gina P. Banyard > >> Hi Gina! I hope this email finds you well. Sincerely, thank you for your feedback; it's clear that you are addressing this issue with the best intentions. I want to say that I understand the importance of this rule and keeping the mailing list conversations relevant, especially given the large audience. I want to also acknowledge that I have occasionally responded quickly without fully considering the impact on readability. Moving forward, I will make a conscious effort to ensure my emails are more thoroughly reviewed. Regarding your point about condensing emails, I see where you are coming from. However, my approach has been to respond within the same thread to maintain context, which I believe helps keep the discussion more organized for threaded readers. I understand that there is probably a balance there and will be more mindful in the future. > For the past 2–3 months, you have sent the vast majority of emails on this list, this is not > what I would consider normal To understand just how bad I was breaking this rule, I created https://email.catcounter.guru/ for anyone on the list to see where they currently stand with their post-ratio in comparison to others. It is updated every two hours, and you can enter an email address in the top-right to unmask an email address, otherwise the email addresses are anonymous. Best regards, Rob