Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:123896
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <6D0733B2-A1D1-45EC-B93E-029B1616A22F@miles.systems>
 <71dc8137-ded0-41dc-bc9b-32dde12f9170@app.fastmail.com> <be7bc3e2-ce2b-422f-9f3a-743829f1e1be@scriptfusion.com>
In-Reply-To: <be7bc3e2-ce2b-422f-9f3a-743829f1e1be@scriptfusion.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:15:37 -0600
Message-ID: <CAM7F2-_8qVRnd+LZ_XNf=d5L3Ver39oHMXUqJbMK3j=vX16z1w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [Initial Feedback] Typed Arrays
To: Bilge <bilge@scriptfusion.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000082dc42061bd18420"
From: lnearwaju@gmail.com (Lanre)

--00000000000082dc42061bd18420
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 3:10=E2=80=AFPM Bilge <bilge@scriptfusion.com> wrot=
e:

> On 26/06/2024 21:56, Casper Langemeijer wrote:
>
>  Generics or bust.
>
>
> I do not understand the reasoning behind that. Is it because we really
> want generics, but when the 95% use-case is solved we fear that there wou=
ld
> not be enough momentum to get that? I'd love to have generics too, but a
> very simple array syntax would in my opinion still add a lot of value, ev=
en
> if we already had generics.
>
> It's not that there wouldn't be enough momentum; if anything, a successfu=
l
> typed arrays PR could give rise to such momentum. If it were possible to
> have typed arrays that were fully compatible with an (imagined) generics
> specification then I would be all for it. The problem is, how can we ever
> ensure compatibility with something that doesn't exist?
>
> It seems to me we either solve is problem properly (with generics) or not
> at all.
>
> Cheers,
> Bilge
>

I disagree, in fact it would be super easy to make T[] translate to
array<T> if generics ever become a thing in php, but it doesn't make any
sense to keep holding off on implementing this just because it might not be
compatible with an implementation of generics that may never come.

Cheers,
Lanre

--00000000000082dc42061bd18420
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 3:10=E2=80=AF=
PM Bilge &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bilge@scriptfusion.com">bilge@scriptfusion.c=
om</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex=
"><u></u>

 =20
   =20
 =20
  <div>
    <div>On 26/06/2024 21:56, Casper Langemeijer
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type=3D"cite">
     =20
     =20
     =20
      <blockquote type=3D"cite">
        <div>=C2=A0Generics or bust.<br>
        </div>
      </blockquote>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>I do not understand the reasoning behind that. Is it because
        we really want generics, but when the 95% use-case is solved we
        fear that there would not be enough momentum to get that? I&#39;d
        love to have generics too, but a very simple array syntax would
        in my opinion still add a lot of value, even if we already had
        generics.</div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>It&#39;s not that there wouldn&#39;t be enough momentum; if anything=
, a
      successful typed arrays PR could give rise to such momentum. If it
      were possible to have typed arrays that were fully compatible with
      an (imagined) generics specification then I would be all for it.
      The problem is, how can we ever ensure compatibility with
      something that doesn&#39;t exist?</p>
    <p>It seems to me we either solve is problem properly (with
      generics) or not at all.</p>
    <p>Cheers,<br>
      Bilge<br></p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I disagree, in fa=
ct it would be super easy to make T[] translate to array&lt;T&gt; if generi=
cs ever become a thing in php, but it doesn&#39;t make any sense to keep ho=
lding off on implementing this just because it might not be compatible with=
 an implementation of generics that may never come.</div><div><br></div><di=
v>Cheers,=C2=A0</div><div>Lanre=C2=A0</div></div></div>

--00000000000082dc42061bd18420--