Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:105069
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHN63oMjO-7cdnF55Mrj-MxVrq9mvm5=c2M681CuXLkE_Hez_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAESVnVpcTTC-77EjLgH-9jwbPgzaR2x_JV+D00SMffWKgU=bkw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHN63oP4p-VdK=J3L3vi0GygHawRq5KkCHJEF0tFoQBtSezGiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALKiJKrbcv42cyWYqLfizzNVGc55Z4qEW+X6gfxzoVENSrnZuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHN63oOfR3DD9b_xHLPUh20=jJFQTJH+Qce298k-4vm6X4bdKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <65AF9E1E-DFA6-47AE-952B-9ABEBD9B6038@gmail.com> <CAHN63oMqOgCgh6voyL0sjXQJEnMKQ=NJ+MXQuU0355EG8Apffw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHN63oMz1YM5c0V7QLGOJ=1LKEasMuHVxwsdbrxC==5Up6=mMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <284d1f9f-03d3-1488-77dd-82e18edf9f4c@gmail.com> <CAHN63oOqx9AxU=ofAQceKEQoJqYTuku1AWGa-sw=BLMTMP0Vjw@mail.gmail.com>
 <db94829a-3ffb-998b-08cd-67eb36ea4cc2@gmail.com> <CAFPFaMK5hs3y5VziAnqDjM1sz3-RLvQUgUj0gQYuxshbd_rFGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHN63oOZ6x6PEOJo=u9gVR-5f+87sD7jpwKnw7kKiohf3LSDLg@mail.gmail.com> <3144F5D1-1F18-4C42-9B3E-AF1B1E598E47@koalephant.com>
In-Reply-To: <3144F5D1-1F18-4C42-9B3E-AF1B1E598E47@koalephant.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 10:58:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CAG9XoMTTk8Wf+55AQ-PhJ5NLMgz3=7VyXDk_BJvEByb2_6zysA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephen Reay <php-lists@koalephant.com>
Cc: "M. W. Moe" <mo.mu.wss@gmail.com>, "G. P. B." <george.banyard@gmail.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003496da0585b095b9"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Question about adding !function_identifier
From: benjamin.morel@gmail.com (Benjamin Morel)

--0000000000003496da0585b095b9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>
> Quite honestly knowing that a function =E2=80=9Cthrows=E2=80=9D but not *=
what* it throws,
> is useless.
> Now if it were a proposal to add *runtime checked* `throws FooException,
> BarTypeError` or similar, I could get behind.


  Same here.

On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 02:48, Stephen Reay <php-lists@koalephant.com> wrote:

>
>
> > On 4 Apr 2019, at 03:29, M. W. Moe <mo.mu.wss@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >> On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 1:24 PM G. P. B. <george.banyard@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I don't really see the point of it as you self said this wouldn't add =
a
> >> runtime check, so in what is it different to a comment?
> >> More so reusing ! for this will, in my opinion, just lead to confusion
> as
> >> people will think it negates the function, this is what
> >> I would expect it to do at first glance.
> >> Also comparing it to the nullable question mark is quite bizarre I fin=
d,
> >> why not choose the ampersand for references instead?
> >> At least it would cover the same "scope", as types have nothing to do
> with
> >> how a function behaves.
> >>
> >> Best regards
> >>
> >> George P. Banyard
> >>
>
> Quite honestly knowing that a function =E2=80=9Cthrows=E2=80=9D but not *=
what* it throws,
> is useless.
>
> Now if it were a proposal to add *runtime checked* `throws FooException,
> BarTypeError` or similar, I could get behind.
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--0000000000003496da0585b095b9--