RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: internals Digest 18 Apr 2012 20:34:27 -0000 Issue 2671
| From: | Clint M Priest | Date: | Fri, 20 Apr 2012 01:47:09 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: internals Digest 18 Apr 2012 20:34:27 -0000 Issue 2671 | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-60221@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
I like this idea quite a bit, it would allow for more rapid deprecation of outdated ideas.
Wouldn't this require multiple interpreters though? Might add a lot of complexity to the code
as well, possibly not.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rasmus Schultz [mailto:rasmus@mindplay.dk]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 9:42 PM
To: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: internals Digest 18 Apr 2012 20:34:27 -0000 Issue 2671
> On 04/10/2012 06:20 PM, Adir Kuhn wrote:
>
> "PHP Gotchas, how they came to be, and why we can't simply fix them"
>
can't or won't?
It seems that the requirement for backward compatibility, as with most software, stands in the way
of any substantial leaps, and makes it impossible to do away with outdated cruft. As a result, PHP
is dragging around a lot of baggage - both the language itself and the libraries.
Hey, here's a crazy thought:
<?php6
Now you don't have to be backward compatible - the bytecode needs to remain compatible with
bytecode generated by standard <?php tags of course, but you're free to
change/improve/deprecate/extend the syntax, update inconsistent APIs, etc.
I know this is no small thing, heh. I'm sure there's some technical reason this isn't
even feasible or possible...
I just figured I'd bring it up anyway, it's always fun to see your reactions to such
radical ideas - bring on the flames! ;-)
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php