Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:37236
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain sambarrow.com from 208.70.128.104 cause and error)
To: Nathan Nobbe <quickshiftin@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeremy Privett <jeremy@omegavortex.net>, Alain Williams <addw@phcomp.co.uk>,  internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <7dd2dc0b0804251224s750679acn169637efbd8653fa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1209137410.6642.9.camel@sbarrow-desktop>
	 <1209147362.20639.7.camel@sbarrow-desktop>
	 <20080425182341.GB14490@mint.phcomp.co.uk>
	 <1209149047.20639.18.camel@sbarrow-desktop>
	 <48122C14.7070705@omegavortex.net>
	 <1209150944.20639.24.camel@sbarrow-desktop>
	 <7dd2dc0b0804251224s750679acn169637efbd8653fa@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:25:05 -0400
Message-ID: <1209151505.20639.25.camel@sbarrow-desktop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Return type hinting patch
From: sam@sambarrow.com (Sam Barrow)

On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 13:24 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Sam Barrow <sam@sambarrow.com> wrote:
>         On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 14:08 -0500, Jeremy Privett wrote:
>         > Sam Barrow wrote:
>         > > I figured it out, the syntax is now as follows:
>         > >
>         > > function a($b, $c) returns d {
>         > > }
>         > >
>         > > I'll post an update soon.
>         > >
>         > >
>         > >
>         >
>         > That's certainly a non-intuitive syntax. How about we take a
>         page out of
>         > the book of other C-style languages before trying to invent
>         something
>         > else? I agree with Stas, "return" and "returns" are not part
>         of a
>         > function definition.
>         
>         
>         I don't think it's non-intuitive at all, and even so, it's the
>         most intuitive we have. This ordering makes more sense to me
>         at first glance (in the order I would think about things;
>         scope, name, arguments, return).
> 
> im not sure the following has been explicitly proposed, but how about
> omitting the 'return' keyword and placing the return type hint before
> the function identifier
> 
> function int a($b, $c) {}
> 

This is, but I don't think this is possible, due to confusion with the
keywords (public, private, static, abstract, etc). Plus this leads to
long strings of keywords.

> i think that is most congruent with 'typical' of c style languages,
> no ?
> 
> -nathan
> 
>