Re: Re: [VOTE] Vote change for empty() RFC
| From: | Gustavo Lopes | Date: | Sun, 13 May 2012 13:07:08 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [VOTE] Vote change for empty() RFC | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-60541@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Sun, 13 May 2012 14:56:23 +0200, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@googlemail.com> wrote:
I just closed the vote for this RFC. The result (see https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_isset_exprs#vote) is: * Both empty() and isset(): 3 * Only empty(): 13 * None: 4 I'm not exactly sure what the policy for votes with three options is, but given that the large majority voted for "Only empty()", I'll assume that that's the accepted option.The rule is that "a feature affecting the language itself (new syntax for example) will be considered as 'accepted' if it wins a 2/3 of the votes". 13 votes in 20 is not 2/3 of the votes. So the question is whether any of the persons that voted for "both empty() and isset()" prefers "only empty()" to "none. -- Gustavo Lopes