Hi Internals!
I am pleased to announce my RFC: Static class is now open for voting: <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_class>
The voting will run for just shy of 4 weeks to allow extra time during this busy period prior to code freeze.
Kind regards,
Bilge
On 15/07/2024 09:28, Bilge wrote:
Hi Internals!
I am pleased to announce my RFC: /Static class/ is now open for voting: <PHP: rfc:static_class;
The voting will run for just shy of 4 weeks to allow extra time during this busy period prior to code freeze.
Kind regards,
Bilge
Hi Internals,
Voting has now concluded for /static class/. The first vote cast was /for/, and of the first four votes cast, three were for and one was against. As the votes continued to roll in, however, it was clear which direction the wind was blowing. The final tally reached the the 2/3 critical mass required... in the negative. With 20 votes against and only 11 for, with one final vote being cast /for /in the final few days, it would not come close to saving this one. With such a blowout defeat, I consider this proposal dismissed with prejudice, meaning we'll never speak of it again.
Even so, I wish to thank everyone whom voted, especially those whom voted for, and those whom voted against but stated their reasons. With a total of 31 votes cast, the turnout was just as high as for more significant RFCs, such as aviz and lazy objects. I am very thankful for that level of interest and participation. Amongst those whom voted /for/ were the maintainers of many significant userland projects and libraries, including Composer, Symfony, Laminas, Amp and Doctrine. I'm sorry we couldn't bring this one home for you.
This was my first RFC so understandably I was somewhat emotionally invested in it, even though the significance of the feature was low. Along the way I learned a lot and met many new people whom inspired me to complete this work. One of the PHPF members even said to me, "I think you did a good job with both writing and implementation." Although one could view the result as an absolute defeat, receiving that feedback from someone I admire means I view this as an absolute win.
Maybe there will be more RFCs from me in future. There's something addictive about chipping away at the source and learning how things really work behind the scenes. It's not like commercial spaghetti where half the code is pure nonsense and would be better off deleted. Everything is in its correct place and exists for good reason; there's a truth and beauty to it just waiting to be discovered, and I expect that will keep me coming back for a while.
Cheers,
Bilge
Voting has now concluded for static class. The first vote cast was
for, and of the first four votes cast, three were for and one was
against. As the votes continued to roll in, however, it was clear
which direction the wind was blowing. The final tally reached the the
2/3 critical mass required... in the negative. With 20 votes against
and only 11 for, with one final vote being cast for in the final few
days, it would not come close to saving this one. With such a blowout
defeat, I consider this proposal dismissed with prejudice, meaning
we'll never speak of it again.
I like the idea of static classes.
On 10/08/2024 23:32, Nick Lockheart wrote:
Voting has now concluded for static class. The first vote cast was
for, and of the first four votes cast, three were for and one was
against. As the votes continued to roll in, however, it was clear
which direction the wind was blowing. The final tally reached the the
2/3 critical mass required... in the negative. With 20 votes against
and only 11 for, with one final vote being cast for in the final few
days, it would not come close to saving this one. With such a blowout
defeat, I consider this proposal dismissed with prejudice, meaning
we'll never speak of it again.I like the idea of static classes.
NEVER AGAIN! 
On Sat, 2024-08-10 at 23:37 +0100, Bilge wrote:
On 10/08/2024 23:32, Nick Lockheart wrote:
> > Voting has now concluded for static class. The first vote cast
> > was
> > for, and of the first four votes cast, three were for and one was
> > against. As the votes continued to roll in, however, it was clear
> > which direction the wind was blowing. The final tally reached the
> > the
> > 2/3 critical mass required... in the negative. With 20 votes
> > against
> > and only 11 for, with one final vote being cast for in the final
> > few
> > days, it would not come close to saving this one. With such a
> > blowout
> > defeat, I consider this proposal dismissed with prejudice,
> > meaning
> > we'll never speak of it again.
> I like the idea of static classes.NEVER AGAIN!
Seriously, Don't give up.
readonly properties were declined in 2014. It's now part of PHP.
There's many other examples like that.
Sometimes you just need to beat the dead horse until it turns into
Pegasus.
On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 9:23 AM Nick Lockheart <lists@ageofdream.com> wrote:
On Sat, 2024-08-10 at 23:37 +0100, Bilge wrote:
On 10/08/2024 23:32, Nick Lockheart wrote:
Voting has now concluded for static class. The first vote cast
was
for, and of the first four votes cast, three were for and one was
against. As the votes continued to roll in, however, it was clear
which direction the wind was blowing. The final tally reached the
the
2/3 critical mass required… in the negative. With 20 votes
against
and only 11 for, with one final vote being cast for in the final
few
days, it would not come close to saving this one. With such a
blowout
defeat, I consider this proposal dismissed with prejudice,
meaning
we’ll never speak of it again.
I like the idea of static classes.NEVER AGAIN!
Seriously, Don’t give up.
readonly properties were declined in 2014. It’s now part of PHP.
There’s many other examples like that.
Sometimes you just need to beat the dead horse until it turns into
Pegasus.
What Nick said, I proposed this before you and even implemented the base features, which you then got to build upon, we just have to wait for the next crazy guy to think this is good idea and hopefully he has better luck with convincing the others.
Cheers, Lanre.
On 11/08/2024 17:56, Lanre wrote:
On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 9:23 AM Nick Lockheart <lists@ageofdream.com> wrote:
Seriously, Don't give up.
readonly properties were declined in 2014. It's now part of PHP.
There's many other examples like that.
Sometimes you just need to beat the dead horse until it turns into
Pegasus.What Nick said, I proposed this before you and even implemented the base features, which you then got to build upon, we just have to wait for the next crazy guy to think this is good idea and hopefully he has better luck with convincing the others.
Cheers, Lanre.
I am reminded of a situation I witnessed many years ago in the days of my PHP infancy where I observed a guy, whom I think may have been from somewhere in East Asia, whom submitted many RFCs (or maybe they were just PRs; this could have even been before RFCs), none of which ever came even close to passing/getting merged. Yet still he continued on for quite some time. I could not fathom how someone would not get the message, persevering despite everyone for so long. I do not believe he is still around, but now I realise I am at risk of becoming him.
Cheers,
Bilge
This was my first RFC so understandably I was somewhat emotionally invested in it, even though the significance of the feature was low. Along the way I learned a lot and met many new people whom inspired me to complete this work. One of the PHPF members even said to me, "I think you did a good job with both writing and implementation." Although one could view the result as an absolute defeat, receiving that feedback from someone I admire means I view this as an absolute win.
-----
I watched your RFC discusion unfold. You did a fantastic job and I hope you continue to contribute.
-Jeff
On 12/08/2024 15:16, Jeffrey Dafoe wrote:
This was my first RFC so understandably I was somewhat emotionally invested in it, even though the significance of the feature was low. Along the way I learned a lot and met many new people whom inspired me to complete this work. One of the PHPF members even said to me, "I think you did a good job with both writing and implementation." Although one could view the result as an absolute defeat, receiving that feedback from someone I admire means I view this as an absolute win.
-----
I watched your RFC discusion unfold. You did a fantastic job and I hope you continue to contribute.
-Jeff
Thanks Jeff 