Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:37238
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 64.233.182.186 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer;
        b=QWRc/hnR20/fhFmeV/9sc2H4mfgJfR/izfGDC2SK/+XDdz8PcZlIkSNyKMY6+2zVrVUxFWdK/TVThhe8vt63a6v7HVtfmNzzDm5EfbI7PHFkd6jnqdaHl+iaxrzB9VabhvIhujcBbpaH5JHltufi6v7g96Ykcg3+yEv5XbK8QlA=
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753)
In-Reply-To: <1209151505.20639.25.camel@sbarrow-desktop>
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> <1209151505.20639.25.camel@sbarrow-desktop>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-ID: <EEAC2E14-4579-4E31-8DAF-CE0D2C1BA6E4@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 22:19:25 +0100
To: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Return type hinting patch
From: michal.dziemianko@gmail.com (Michal Dziemianko)

Hello everybody,
I am new here (just reading for last couple of days), so firstly nice  
to meet you:)
This discussion seems quite interesting for me and it would be nice  
if I can join...

Sam Barrow napisal:
>>
>> 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).

Parser should be able to handle it if the grammar is correct.
  "something something2 somethign3 int foo(...)" works fine in some  
languages.

LALR parser (Bison is used, isn't it?) is probably the most powerful  
parser practically used, and certainly can handle such a set of  
keywords correctly - even without "function" keyword (that makes  
parsing way easier) - or maybe I have missed some piece of syntax  
that might cause the problem (then my apologies)

As there is a person working on converting parser to Lemon, maybe it  
would be wise to talk with him (her?), so the grammar is cleaned to  
handle it.

> Plus this leads to
> long strings of keywords.

imho it is shorter - one keyword less. Actually it is also less  
confusing for me - maybe because I am using C/C++ and Java a lot  
where the syntax is equivalent. And if syntax is strict - i.e.  
modifiers first, then returned type - is quite well-readable - name  
of the function in the end, returned type just before.

The version with "returns" seems to me like "throws" phrase from e.g.  
Java. Btw there was already such a solution in Pascal, but instead of  
"returns" colon was used:

function foo(...):integer begin
...
end

Cheers,
Michal Dziemianko

PS. The idea is great anyways - I was always thinking why it is not  
implemented:))