Hi
On 7/9/24 19:53, David CARLIER wrote:
Agreed, I ll likely just commit as is sometime this week.
I hereby formally claim that this is not a simple self-contained feature. It does require an RFC.
The addition of global `IMAGE_CMP_*` constants effectively introduces an entirely new "namespace" within the existing list of constants and thus I do not believe that consistency with the existing GD functionality is a valid reason. As such I believe they should follow the https://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaces_in_bundled_extensions RFC and be placed inside the `Gd` namespace - or ideally be replaced by a proper enum or so.
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
Hi
On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 at 19:16, Tim Düsterhus <tim@bastelstu.be> wrote:
Hi
On 7/9/24 19:53, David CARLIER wrote:
Agreed, I ll likely just commit as is sometime this week.
I hereby formally claim that this is not a simple self-contained
feature. It does require an RFC.
The addition of global IMAGE_CMP_* constants effectively introduces an
entirely new “namespace” within the existing list of constants and thus
I do not believe that consistency with the existing GD functionality is
a valid reason. As such I believe they should follow the
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/namespaces_in_bundled_extensions RFC and be
placed inside the Gd namespace - or ideally be replaced by a proper
enum or so.
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
Alright, I hear you. Anyhow, there is a debate for having a full internal version of a somewhat similar feature. We will see…