Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:102349
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain koalephant.com designates 206.123.115.54 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\))
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c_L7S+EB8YxdNNpNZ7NhhYwCbwEw5_TSnSwUNN-zLVvCg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 22:32:35 +0700
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <F3754DDB-F048-460A-9C59-61E59736FC6A@koalephant.com>
References: <CAF+90c_L7S+EB8YxdNNpNZ7NhhYwCbwEw5_TSnSwUNN-zLVvCg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Typed Properties
From: php-lists@koalephant.com (Stephen Reay)


> On 21 Jun 2018, at 4:59 am, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> Hi internals,
>=20
> Bob and I would like to present a new typed properties proposal for =
your
> consideration:
>=20
>    https://wiki.php.net/rfc/typed_properties_v2
>=20
> The proposal allows you to annotate properties with types, which are
> enforced at runtime. Unlike the previous RFC on this topic, the new
> proposal also supports typed static properties and references to typed
> properties.
>=20
> Please note that next to the main body, the RFC also contains an
> "Alternatives" section, which explores the problem space and considers
> trade-offs of different behaviors in some detail.
>=20
> Finally, while this RFC currently targets PHP 7.3, this is a large and
> complex proposal and we may not be able to meet the deadline, in which =
case
> this feature will go into the next PHP version.
>=20
> Regards,
> Nikita

Hi Nikita/Bob,

I=E2=80=99m *really* happy to see someone taking another stab at this.

My only =E2=80=98input=E2=80=99 as such, is around the decision to omit =
`callable`. Given that we *have* Closures (thus allowing a developer to =
explicitly state that they want something they can invoke regardless of =
context, if they so wish), I think `callable` should be a valid type for =
properties too. The language doesn=E2=80=99t prevent floating point math =
because you might not get the result you expect - it simply documents =
and warns people that they need to be aware of some inherent attributes =
of the feature.


Whether that particular aspect of the RFC changes or not, again, thank =
you both for working on this!


Cheers

Stephen