Re: [PHP-LANG] "Mission Statement"

At 17:16 21-11-00, Sascha Schumann wrote:
> > I don't think that a compiler spec is useful, helping Microsoft's .NET (or
> > other forking bodies, like GPL fanatics) team isn't on my agenda either and
> > I don't think that it would be beneficial for the PHP project at all (and
> > I'm sure most people here feel the same).  There's theory, and there's
> > reality, and the spec you're talking about is a purely theoretical,
> > useful-for-forking, fairly-useless-for-practical-use type of spec.
>
>     You should not be worried about your investment into Zend.
>     The Zend engine will still be the number one choice for a
>     long time. If the engine maintains its technical lead, users
>     will stay with you and your product folio.

I'm not worried - I don't see the point in aiming at a document that would 
help forks, though.  Forks are not such an unlikely thing to happen (e.g., 
that GPL fanatic guy that mailed group@ the other day).  I'm not really 
worried about him, but I sure don't want to help him breaking PHP up.

>         Can you name me any language which was harmed by a
>         standardization effort?

I don't know really, I haven't studied languages history.  I know that what 
the users would want is a user-oriented document, and not a 
compiler-spec.  A compiler spec will probably not be too harmful (even 
though it'll encourage forks, to some degree), but I agree with Rasmus that 
this should not be the main concern of this forum.

>     I agree with you that diversity of the PHP language is bad.
>     That is why I'm here and proposing a standardization effort
>     for the language we know as PHP. We cannot prevent forks,
>     but we can prevent diversity.


I suggest we give it a start and see how it goes.  This usually proves to 
be the best approach, instead of discussing theocratically in advance...

Zeev

--
Zeev Suraski <[email protected]>
CTO, Zend Technologies Ltd. http://www.zend.com/