Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:103231 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 86652 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2018 23:28:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com) (66.111.4.25) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 22 Sep 2018 23:28:56 -0000 Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DF4D21607 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 15:36:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 22 Sep 2018 15:36:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=AVJtye7G501ThwYeIvOXdRsguFf8a H4MyLAwOykMNyM=; b=uTV7ZOfsRFyY1cYlBQcL6tM66SCmt/gkSK85Hz1FoVScS DzM+ktnkNJ9ITKf/0a5Wfbs3kzEJZtdB/hMWzsaSudaUMTHg3ppWYO7INnrkO4h0 906OSyR5GehRS4xYUOG5TCOjoUejME3cTzTQsAI+GPiUh9bQZfzbrnPqzF8rroan e5OEzmtqrD7tgv8NEHevZllHx2mpsvUaaQB20mAccvobV1B0inr/rl5+h0Cd+rnh d7BU1iKOQ9ruzobcLGxE1cK0JO/99k+7AafwvwmqJakSgRKlI8rdFjSwYXsBbUbI tu6fvMyjChfFdf+IIDXYnEuBtKs9VhYjploaaZALw== X-ME-Proxy: X-ME-Sender: Received: from vulcan.localnet (216-80-30-152.s3222.c3-0.frg-cbr1.chi-frg.il.cable.rcncustomer.com [216.80.30.152]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id ABDF3102D6 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 15:36:06 -0400 (EDT) To: internals@lists.php.net Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 14:36:03 -0500 Message-ID: <1867315.DCa4sVk4sc@vulcan> In-Reply-To: References: <5273905.aE8IdBJUB6@vulcan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart6134086.4ICv8krD75"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Typed properties v2 From: larry@garfieldtech.com (Larry Garfield) --nextPart6134086.4ICv8krD75 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Saturday, September 22, 2018 2:32:04 PM CDT Rasmus Schultz wrote: > Larry, > > this wasn't aimed at "you" personally, I'm just using the proverbial "you", > as in "not me". > > if you read my last post (especially the last part) carefully, you'll see > why this elephant analogy is incomplete. > > the issue is not whether or not something gets in - it's much more far > reaching than that. > > the issue is, once something gets in, can you even be sure that that > something is what it claims to be? .. Yes? > at the moment you can't, and that's a serious issue - type hints appear to > provide some guarantees that in fact aren't provided at all. it's > confusing, and the explanations are more complex than they need to be. > > (and I guess that's generally an issue in very dynamic languages, but type > hints are supposed to provide a means to improve on these problems where it > makes sense - not make the problems worse.) Do you have a code sample to explain what you mean? At the moment I really have a hard time envisioning what the pitfall is, especially if we were to add checkpoint validity checks. What's the code that would appear safe but really isn't? Please show us, because I don't know what it is. --Larry Garfield --nextPart6134086.4ICv8krD75 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEE/ph/GXfY8v0YwFBp4MMKwDFxYXcFAlummaMACgkQ4MMKwDFx YXcv1QgAqjzTE9UsUro0AgQs3xHiwhHUwb6VpdQ5gfayln3hufxojP7tYXbyM/z7 7WgKZl3BSjHCMKvgOQeK8UPQ4+WXAp7BfdmbGHmwWdsjpJAGy5j5B2eoBYCnthyW Cr/0Inj4Q3ksA3IRIelqbx5qDKO4/kCEaRoxvf0MLNCXyalO9a7tf4HAm6vUv3fk MfsvQr3zjpWvYCCreBuBxORX4qUHoVlAj0JCQ1yIM46FwPGfS413o2EUuq+a4kcw GNVOxXG1536chsDuBp8MH9CoXaRVd1Hv57xqYKTijHgpE6F3opZ1yIDJoLXTVvqu shadOCFdGzcjMWg/wYCxI1/DeIC/9A== =z/eD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart6134086.4ICv8krD75--