Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101393 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 60762 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2017 20:59:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Dec 2017 20:59:50 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lists@rhsoft.net; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lists@rhsoft.net; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain rhsoft.net designates 91.118.73.15 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lists@rhsoft.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 91.118.73.15 mail.thelounge.net Received: from [91.118.73.15] ([91.118.73.15:62711] helo=mail.thelounge.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 93/A6-10479-6CD793A5 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 15:59:50 -0500 Received: from srv-rhsoft.rhsoft.net (Authenticated sender: h.reindl@thelounge.net) by mail.thelounge.net (THELOUNGE MTA) with ESMTPSA id 3z1Vdt38lCzXMP for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 21:59:46 +0100 (CET) To: internals@lists.php.net References: <3a8054fd-b99f-771f-1f6c-29cf198acdeb@phpgangsta.de> <7d0661d1-c41a-f772-63bb-5296f2fcc62c@rhsoft.net> <09b34130-5a92-604c-44f2-536c3f527609@fleshgrinder.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 21:59:45 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <09b34130-5a92-604c-44f2-536c3f527609@fleshgrinder.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: de-CH Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Mixed Typehint From: lists@rhsoft.net ("lists@rhsoft.net") Am 19.12.2017 um 21:53 schrieb Fleshgrinder: > On 12/19/2017 8:01 PM, lists@rhsoft.net wrote: >> but that's a different thing and both don't collide > > It's not a different thing, that's what I try to tell you. They do not > collide, of course not, but having the others is going to make mixed > useless. > > In other words: if there is no type left to constraint to, it must be > the top type. (Note that we already have the ability to constraint to > the bottom type void.) > > Other languages invest quite some time into getting rid of annotating > their top types (and type inversion) and we already have this > functionality and you (not you in person but the collective here asking > for it) want to introduce it. Stanislav is right, this type would be > there for no technical reason. > > It is only for cosmetics or maybe to allow people to say "my codebase is > fully type constrained". Which is literally a meaningless statement. yes, it's mostly cosmetic (frankly even the OP statet this in the initial mail) but if that comes witout a noticebale price to pay why not? "It's a simple alias for the current behavior of no type and is fully interchangeable" sounds like it could even be optimized out at compile time of the script - so "you don't need it" is not much compelling for me