Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115736
Return-Path: <kjarli@gmail.com>
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 69885 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2021 10:12:07 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5)
by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 15 Aug 2021 10:12:07 -0000
Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB241804CF
for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sun, 15 Aug 2021 03:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS
autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17
X-Spam-Virus: No
X-Envelope-From: <kjarli@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-io1-f46.google.com (mail-io1-f46.google.com [209.85.166.46])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS
for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sun, 15 Aug 2021 03:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-f46.google.com with SMTP id t13so5690547ioj.7
for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sun, 15 Aug 2021 03:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc;
bh=g5rgCb9x6J/k8HhTaZVh1GgR8/kO885mXq3s+VnipLY=;
b=AxaC2q7CUSJRFKfxFZMJTjaeL6U7Lf0z8pVbwzqI6UswAhUybYS70gyuab4GaVabcn
hRJd5GRbF7Pf/b2LG8ca1w5iTJ+DXDhlLIJMzun2kMYInWzadgLflH+Cvr4q0tjGAiuB
83rqP5zmmRoJBis1uo9QJP9jEKXuRoiiqoXd0D5ar+xasnaNQ2ngmjL+9Guu3XwKMb1B
s2IFFrSljxGiLcN86iMUX5mHYr0rHVt9PQwt4HbuQScp0UcZRDRwKgtaXD4csxgc6ef2
n0jP3GEPyYkTjoaTWpeDSWMjrWtWOubzDSAcaL/30rte4JD0tw3unO9SEPmZc18fZiSu
mXnQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=g5rgCb9x6J/k8HhTaZVh1GgR8/kO885mXq3s+VnipLY=;
b=cRzwTKH+Y2oX9yVUACXHkji99cvbNbu6j1p4IHQhugDucg9BAG6J/Jepa0leTR3tcM
7gq32A+fUAyI7NrGQg5KzdMSMQXT1aVfYalkUwfhLc1m5gkF2Dfniztmn/UZZgm+Ejwd
G2mzB2ZAoQpPbuRPGSXs0AbfvwRn2E0Wluem36wS5kqOiPX0cdBOclEd08haS1GvWOnY
CS1LbX5rDypwOrkpEuw7b0vZPvqTu9eU8c8DUApLQASCAkIywFjZcN7UFamK0W4U4gfo
HDRvRL9qwY86ocYSWCSZo8n6pJprIM0Q5Mu14+ohmK4ewB1sU5AFRGd7jgp6zCPPJaIT
u9ew==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531BicNwbqQ54JJFYOrdwsy8vwKnrOhGvp9WmhL+46EG9SArqCbM
S7T6hrsS1P0U9uSbRg08P6O7rR+dPkurxXLFZQ0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzUFprN4K+3V+fX07B3HErChLezBMSMuzZTrtICigY2prFXDQMkNIB4W7ZEIv45XvoDcyym5DceYrAkn44r1Pc=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:2348:: with SMTP id u69mr10431768jau.141.1629024226264;
Sun, 15 Aug 2021 03:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMrTa2HYeKaE9E+A81HvSykpAD8ctd6aK9vtg_U15bYjyjzLKA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMrTa2HYeKaE9E+A81HvSykpAD8ctd6aK9vtg_U15bYjyjzLKA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2021 12:43:21 +0200
Message-ID: <CANS-=pe8L940sX03fOHW4PGn2vVB5vq+tgge+T7oQnmh_nNvqQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jordan LeDoux <jordan.ledoux@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000564b0805c996c2d0"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Never For Argument Types
From: kjarli@gmail.com (Lynn)
--000000000000564b0805c996c2d0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 1:27 AM Jordan LeDoux <jordan.ledoux@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Any feedback is greatly appreciated.
>
https://github.com/JordanRL/never-argument-type
My only feedback is that it should not be called `never`. If I see `never`
as the parameter type, I read this as never being allowed to pass anything,
which means that `foo('something')` with `foo(never $something)` will
result in a compile error. The type `never` only makes sense from a return
type perspective: "Should it return? never". Perhaps `any` or `anything`
makes more sense? I've also seen a suggestion to name it `abstract`, and
maybe there are more suggestions I've missed. To me it also sounds like the
goal of `never` as a parameter type is different from the return type. From
my understanding one indicates that a type is required, while the other
indicates that nothing ever returns, giving it the same name is confusing.
Apologies for sending this message twice to you Jordan, reply to all is not
my default reply button.
--000000000000564b0805c996c2d0--