Friday, February 11. 2005PHP 5.1 BabbleTrackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
It's not just karma that carries weight, but when you're arguing for a new language level feature to appear in PHP, you'd better have done your homework. You need to understand how the parser works, how the compiler works, how classes and objects work and appreciate the various compromises made between performance and features, and you'd better damned well have thought of backwards compatibility.
Arguing purely on the basis of how you like using the feature in another language isn't going to get you anywhere, no matter how well formed your argument is. Keep in mind that the core guys have been coding non-stop since before the birth of the PHP project 10 years ago, and have pretty wide experience of all the major programming languages. We know what the features are; you don't need to tell us. You need to convince us that it is technically possible and has no serious negative effects and that it fits with the PHP spirit. Most features from other languages don't usually meet these criteria.
I think you're 100% correct when you say "You need to convince us that it is technically possible and has no serious negative effects and that it fits with the PHP spirit." I hope that was clear.
My point was that he's crossed the line, and even if he DOES attempt to do this, now, it's too late.. some people may still listen to him, but it seems to me that most just write off his words, immediately. S
I sent an email reply to Sean Coates about this blog, but then realised that I could post a response here, instead.
I realise this thread is from long time ago, but if anyone comes across it (like I did, today), I'd like to give my comment to it, as well. I realise that if I had _demanded_ that PHP should have overloading, or claiming that it without doubt would be a good idea, I could have understood the reaction I got on the list. However, I know very little about PHPs internal structure, which is why I merely _asked_ about features like overloading, and also asked that if it had been discussed earlier, if I could get a pointer to it (so people didn't have to repeat arguments for a subject that may have been discussed to death, earlier). I was, however, very surprised at the response I got from the list: Instead of getting reasoned arguments for or against something (or pointers to earlier discussion), I just basically got "Over my dead body!", "No!", "PHP is not C++!", and other such rubbish. Hardly a single technical argument was given (or pointers to previous discussion, other than "search the archive", which I did, without finding anything about it), only emotional responses about liking or not liking something, or flames. As I said in my posting, I come from the C++ community, and I'm used to professional behaviour in discussions. I was frankly disgusted at what I saw, and got very disappointed at the PHP community, after this. To quote from my mail to Sean Coates: If the people in the PHP community really assess ideas based on whether or not the person contributing them is "known" to the community ("Oh, person X is well-known, so this must be a good idea..."), rather than think for themselves, then I'm sure I don't miss anything by not participating, either. Regards, Terje Slettebø A programmer with 20+ years of experience, including over 3 years with PHP, currently working in a company developing web applications using PHP.
Terje, I sympathize with you on this matter, but I will point out something that explains the situation in black and white. Since you have vastly more software experience than myself, I'm sure you will understand when I say that developers often have trouble adjusting to new ideas. Object-orientation is, despite being around for decades, still fairly new. What I mean by "new" is that a lot of the theory behind it is not well understood, even by long-time users. This is vastly more so the case with PHP because most PHP developers are not object theorists but rather procedural programmers who have only recently been introduced the OO paradigm. And while it would be nice to have all the power of C++ within arm's reach, these features must be introduced gradually--otherwise you risk overwhelming and alienating users.
One more thing:
>If I were him, I'd assume an alias, for the purposes of Internals, and lurk for the next 6 months, >saying little to nothing. Hopefully nobody will notice that he's the same person, if/when he comes back. Actually, I "headed out the door", thoroughly disgusted by what I saw. If this had been at comp.lang.c++, and people had treated a newcomer the way I was treated, I'd been ashamed of associating myself with the C++ community. However, fortunately, the C++ community isn't like that - at all. The C++ community has a lot of bright, friendly people, excited at new ideas, etc. (if you search for my name at comp.lang.c++.moderated, you'll see I've been quite active at times, and usually without any problems at all. It's been a while ago, now, though, as I've been doing PHP for the last years), and I know a lot of them personally. It doesn't matter if you're Bjarne Stroustrup or Joe Sixpack - if you ask a polite question, you deserve a polite answer. Anything else is unprofessional and disrespectful - in layman's terms: Just stupid. And, no, I don't care about anybody's "karma" in my criticism: To me, it doesn't matter _who_ you are, but _what_ you are. See if you can see the difference. If you're a PHP "wizard", but behave like an idiot, you're an idiot in my book. |
Pay the bills...Calendar
QuicksearchArchivesMy PERSONAL BlogNote:
The contents of this blog are my own, PERSONAL opinion and do not represent the thoughts or opinions of the people I work with or for. If you have a beef with something I said, take it up with ME. Thanks (-: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||