Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101432
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <B1.F6.47595.E17F54A5@pb1.pair.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <72392123-d37b-26df-6886-218f48205f8a@fleshgrinder.com> <c126a971-f671-1dc8-384b-4338765996da@rhsoft.net> <58A5ABDF-AA25-46D4-83E7-4DE72E3DFF5E@gmail.com> <757270790.33iDQ9MZ2V@vulcan> <4b55eed1-8656-ff70-e4e9-ad5e40213405@rhsoft.net>
In-Reply-To: <4b55eed1-8656-ff70-e4e9-ad5e40213405@rhsoft.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 08:04:41 -0000
Lines: 1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="Windows-1252";
	reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Scalar Pseudo-type
From: TonyMarston@hotmail.com ("Tony Marston")

wrote in message news:4b55eed1-8656-ff70-e4e9-ad5e40213405@rhsoft.net...
>
>
>
>Am 29.12.2017 um 00:21 schrieb Larry Garfield:
>> Correct.  Union types I've always seen presented as offering both union 
>> and
>> intersection.  There are cases where union is great, and where it's kinda
>> silly.  There are cases where intersect is great, and where it's kinda 
>> silly.
>>
>> Most of the anti- arguments I've seen for "union types" have fixated on 
>> "int &&
>> string is meaningless, and Foo || Bar is bad design, so union types are 
>> bad!"
>> Entirely ignoring the flip side, which is int || string (valid use cases) 
>> and
>> Foo && Bar (many many valid use cases)
>
>well, that explains why the same person which hase a usecase for a "scalar" 
>pseudo-type donw-votes https://wiki.php.net/rfc/union_types but it makes 
>his vote not logical at all
>
>frankly the only valid reasons to down-vote something should be technical 
>ones which matters for the PHP core itself and not "i don't understand a 
>feature hence nobody should have it"

You are missing the point. If an RFC is so badly written that someone does 
not understand it, or understand what benefits it is supposed to provide, 
then there is no point in up-voting it. You may contrive a use case where it 
provides a small benefit, but if that use case is so limited or so obscure 
that it does not apply to a significant number of developers then that RFC 
should be voted down simply because it does not provide any significant 
benefits.

-- 
Tony Marston