Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101591
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.161.177 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACXBjuibgJfRCvp6rpuqZj8BoF9Cdwhmu4oxxqw908NZy4h49w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEUnE0d+rHG-Rvjt7QAN6x6L+BP5Yb_cz8sGuOFDOkx-kCehkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <9a3a8760-f65a-a5c0-b318-1830a9a986c3@gmail.com> <CAH0Uv3H_DEPZ5HmaKGe08_DMrzndBz7ofJTUgeb4f66zeaj1EA@mail.gmail.com>
 <9352F6DF-9940-49A2-9B1D-FA9258E9738E@lerdorf.com> <bb4579ba-2e09-4199-a871-be4428a1ee2d@lsces.co.uk>
 <ee3d2ffc-a72c-78f3-281b-dd029c706105@gmail.com> <CAEUnE0eShfm4kZck=2gBef6cgU6DdrKggtotUK+Jyk6uPYOYFg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACXBjugZrXXORVsaFhJzRO_WEiUXnVEHBBuHZysPUGRN6Ls7nw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEUnE0ce2HRfsKOy_=NSnrENUnGpB4m-C=cMQFV93MgbaMguOQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHWSxWQHtPZdnfA5P4da4ETpQzFTGB_sKDT73vtM15tbNjYi_A@mail.gmail.com> <CACXBjuibgJfRCvp6rpuqZj8BoF9Cdwhmu4oxxqw908NZy4h49w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:48:31 -0600
Message-ID: <CAEUnE0cH1ZnCwpYW4njdgM2B6uJsrzQ3AbRtcy2H_-85xX9urw@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114fbd8462ccc90562707a10"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][DISCUSSION] Strong Typing Syntax
From: tendoaki@gmail.com (Michael Morris)

--001a114fbd8462ccc90562707a10
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 12:27 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote:

>  If you stay away from trying to change a 25-year old loosely typed
> language into a strictly typed one, then the RFC becomes much simpler.
>
> -Rasmus
>

I have REPEATEDLY stated that is not the goal. I don't misrepresent what
you say, please do not do that to me.

I want to see strict typing as an option, not a requirement.

Arggh...

I said I'd stay away from implementation, but would this work?  Working
this into z_val in any way is problematic. So, store elsewhere?

Create a symbol table that holds the strict variables and the types they
are locked into.  The strict keyword pushes them onto that table, the var
keyword pulls them off. When an operation that cares about type occurs
check that table - if the var appears there than authenticate it.

I would hope that if a programmer doesn't want strict typing the overhead
of checking an empty table would be minimal, even if repeated a great many
times.

--001a114fbd8462ccc90562707a10--