-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 552
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Preparing PHP 8.4 announcement page #1079
Conversation
🚀 Preview for commit 9fc3eff can be found at https://web-php-pr-1079.preview.thephp.foundation |
🚀 Regression report for commit 9fc3eff is at https://web-php-regression-report-pr-1079.preview.thephp.foundation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A big feature of this release is also the dedicated PDO Driver subclasses, IMHO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Something like this for DOM?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you. I have some suggestions for the #[\Deprecated]
example to make it self-contained.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also removing the lazy objects from the title, replacing it with the new DOM API which sounds sufficiently shiny.
@saundefined It appears the release page on https://web-php-pr-1079.preview.thephp.foundation/releases/8.4/en.php is broken. Did the deploy fail? I'm not seeing any syntax errors in the last two commits. |
I think so, thanks for pointing that out! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I had a chat with a co-worker about the release page and he disliked the Property Hook example, because:
- It uses western naming assumptions.
- It only shows virtual properties, which as per the RFC is not the main use case of the property hooks. The main use case is not writing methods because they “might” be used.
To fix these issues, we came up with the suggested examples. By using a technical identifier, we do not run into the “Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Names” issue and by leaving languageCode
a regular property we showcase all three main types of hook usage (“no hook”, “set-only hook”, and “virtual property”).
@TimWolla thanks a lot! ❤️ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These methods don't exist in the property hooks version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Based on Tim's feedback:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One more suggestion: I think the Asymmetric Visibility example should have a line which reads the property, so it's clearer that this still works.
@saundefined I would like to contribute with pt_BR for the release. Should I include it in this MR, or make a separate one? |
@marcosmarcolin I think it's better in this one, to merge all the changes at once. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Three messages are not displayed in the page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I noticed some missing return types in the examples.
Co-authored-by: Tim Düsterhus <timwolla@googlemail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added points about:
- new JIT implementation
- function grapheme_str_split().
Co-authored-by: Jorg Adam Sowa <jorg.sowa@gmail.com>
Final preparations before merging, All references to PHP 8.4 from the main page and header have been reverted, A separate PR will be prepared later today as well. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Remove redundant details as all changes are related to PHP 8.4
Co-authored-by: Borislav Kosun <kosun.b@yandex.com>
Let's start preparing for the release.
Any help is welcome, especially from RFC authors :)