Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115566
To: Levi Morrison <levi.morrison@datadoghq.com>,
 Theodore Brown <theodorejb@outlook.com>
Cc: Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas@gmail.com>,
 PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAOWwgp=B7-AvMao0POCF_h_A3A4voHNA_BsjfonBQ8yDHb0v-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <BN7PR05MB4033B26F14CF1726EFFE810ADEE59@BN7PR05MB4033.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAAKU0u=aznvHDBeQoPJoMUhHtDjDzKkMDxdcvPTNC7WT7Yb2AQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <77b313e3-e820-c50e-f921-40de5f41853f@processus.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 18:06:34 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAKU0u=aznvHDBeQoPJoMUhHtDjDzKkMDxdcvPTNC7WT7Yb2AQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable intersection types
From: pierre-php@processus.org (Pierre)

Le 23/07/2021 à 17:56, Levi Morrison via internals a écrit :
>> As you note in the RFC, PHP already defines `|` as having a lower
>> precedence than `&`, so `X & Y | null` can only be interpreted as
>> `(X & Y) | null`. This is consistent with other languages such as
>> TypeScript, where `A & B | C & D` is parsed as `(A & B) | (C & D)`.
>> [2]
>>
>> Since precedence is already defined for this syntax consistently with
>> other languages, I don't think it's necessary to require parentheses
>> if we use the `A & B | null` syntax.
> I want to acknowledge and reject this. Few people keep the bitwise
> precedence information in their head. It's not worth it -- just
> require parenthesis.
>
I don't want to reject this, this is actually a very good point, do not 
reinvent a syntax that works somewhere else. And in the end, I do find 
this readable. (I prey that people will use space in they types 
definitions to make it even more readable, but style is not a topic for 
this RFC.)

Accumulating union and sum types is probably not something I'd do every 
day, so in the end, I'll probably always go and read the documentation 
each and every time. But for people that do, they'll get used to it fast 
enough I think.

This behavior seems fine, at least I think it's fine, as long as the 
documentation is clear.

Regards,

--

Pierre