Great. Any ETA on phpng stable release?
http://grokbase.com/t/php/php-internals/12bvegp9cv/hhvm-and-...
But at the rate PHP's release cycle has accelerated (remember that 5.3 dates from 2009...) it's entirely likely that the trend will continue. And more hosts are offering up-to-date PHP versions as an option.
I still see a future for Zend PHP.
Heck, Python 3 hasn't even replaced Python 2 -- and people will dump PHP for Hack? A language which doesn't even have a community at the moment, it's 99% Facebook people.
Perhaps because some on HN are computer scientists, so to convince them it takes actual numbers and not some anecdotal evidence of what you personally use.
Judging from all available data sources, you are an outlier.
HHVM doesn't have that large a community (mostly FB people), is not installed in the overwhelming majority of hosts, still has compatibility issues, has few posts about it, there are very few mentions of companies using it, and, for what it is, has been largerly ignored in the whole PHP community (forums, etc).
Any other examples of it panning correctly?
In any case, let's check back in 2 years. I doubt Hack/HHVM will have more than 20% adoption even then. Criteria:
Number of hosting providers supporting it. Number of posts on HN from startups using it. Number of relevant community (forum and blog posts, contributors etc) Number of new projects written for it (GitHub) Number of new books appearing for it. Rank in the Tiobe programming language index.
And then goes on to say:
>HHVM doesn't have that large a community (mostly FB people), is not installed in the overwhelming majority of hosts, still has compatibility issues, has few posts about it, there are very few mentions of companies using it, and, for what it is, has been largerly ignored in the whole PHP community (forums, etc).
With zero references to any data.
The difference is that I gave objective and easily checkable statements.
References? I referred to specific items (hosts supporting it: just check the top 10 shared hosting providers), mentions of companies using it (how many have you seen on HN?), compatibility issues (those are documented on the project page), etc.
All of those are references to data sources you can actually check. I'm not going to crunch the numbers for you, but unlike the parent, you don't have to take my word for it.
Pointing to the data themselves is actually more scientific than the "references to data", if by that you mean some websites and news sources feeding you with ready made data points ("20% of developers are thinking of adopting HHVM, we know, we asked 100 of our pals").
a) it's run developed by a company whose policy is "move fast and break things". I have seen the result of this mantra first hand in their fucking terrible Facebook "api" where something breaks every time anyone anywhere in the world farts.
b) the number and nature of incompatibilities are too vast.
c) their intention is pretty clear with "hack" - they want a php-like language but not php. That's fine they can do that but I won't use it.