Talk:PHP

GA Reassessment

PHP

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted. Hog Farm _Talk 22:40, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Multiple issues. The article is peppered with {{cn}} tags, and is largely based on primary sources (with not enough weight being given to third party sources). There is a one line section covering the PHP Foundation which should probably eithier be integrated into "History" (or removed completely). Additionally there are multiple dubious statements and promotional SEAOFBLUEs in the "Use" section while the "Security" section offers uncited WP:NOTGUIDE advice on security matters Sohom (talk) 08:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Type hint" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Type hint has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 6 § Type hint until a consensus is reached. Duckmather (talk) 02:44, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

"Type hinting" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Type hinting has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 6 § Type hinting until a consensus is reached. Duckmather (talk) 02:45, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Detailed minor version of 8.x

I was simply wondering if there is really a need for specific subsections for each minor version of 8.x, especially considering only a paragraph or so is listed for each minor version, and no other major version has such a breakout. It seems to make this page (and TOC) needlessly long. LogicTrace (talk) 19:02, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

I agree, especially since we also have a table with all versions which can contain concise summaries of all the new features. I think the PHP 7 section is also too long, listing some really minor breaking changes; meanwhile, there's no explanation of what was new in PHP 4 at all! It's also not helpful to use "PHP 7" to mean "PHP 7.0", and "PHP 8" to mean "PHP 8.0"; it reads as though nothing significant changed for 5 years.

I suggest a significant restructuring - rename the headers to make clear that they are eras of development, rather than versions, and focus the text to that end:

1. "Early history" - as is
2. "PHP 3 and 4" - needs more content on what motivated 4.0, and what developed during this era (e.g. the move from "registered globals" to "super-global arrays" for form and session data); also, surely we can find some good sources for this being the era when PHP usage really took off
3. "Early PHP 5" or "PHP 5.0 to 5.2" - should cover 5.0, 5.1, and 5.2 only, to avoid timeline jumping; maybe talk a bit more about "go PHP 5" initiative, and why it was necessary
4. "PHP 6 and Unicode" - mostly as is, but maybe move some of the details of what went into 5.3 and 5.4 to the next section
5. "Later PHP 5" or "PHP 5.3 to 5.6" - should talk about how major features intended for PHP 6 were back-ported into 5.3 and 5.4, and the adoption of the current annual release process
6. "PHP 7.x" or "PHP 7.0 to 7.4" - keep the paragraphs about naming and "phpng", but massively trim the section on 7.0's breaking changes; add information about general direction throughout the 7.x series, e.g. enhancements to type system (return types, scalar types, nullable types, union types, ...)
7. "PHP 8.x" or "PHP 8.0 onwards" - talk about the JIT, and again briefly summarise the breaking changes in 8.0; then briefly discuss some significant features added throughout the 8.x series to date, but without repeating the exhaustive lists from the table below

Anyone have any thoughts before I start butchering the article to move it in this direction? - IMSoP (talk) 15:38, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

I've now made a first pass at this. There's still a significant recency bias, with the 7.x and 8.x sections going into lots of detail which could probably be trimmed further. The PHP 3 and 4 section desperately needs more narrative about how significant and popular these were, and how much each changed the language from its predecessor; but I'm reluctant to draft anything without solid facts and references. - IMSoP (talk) 20:48, 12 October 2025 (UTC)