Re: "Mission Statement"

> Well, that's true, but to the average user, saying what's going to work on > a 32-bit platform, what's going to work on a 64-bit platform, and what he > can always rely on is the best thing. Saying what works on 32/64-bit platforms would make the specification implementation-dependent. That is something I want to especially avoid. > > Having said that, I think we should keep the "portable" > > keyword in the Mission statement. Even though some things > > will be implementation-dependent, the lowest common deminator > > will be present in definitions like the one above, striving > > for portability of user scripts. > > Well, I think that the mission statement should be changed so that it's > understandable that the result document would be for the users, and not for > Microsoft's compiler team or whatever... Well, and if Microsoft now chooses to add PHP to its .NET platform, there is basically nothing to prevent them from writing a replacement for the Zend engine. If we had a language spec, at least the outcome would be clear and useful to the PHP community. PHP needs continuity which we cannot reach with the current status quo of a pure reference implementation. - Sascha