Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:42353
Return-Path: <ionut.g.stan@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 42005 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2008 15:51:56 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 19 Dec 2008 15:51:56 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ionut.g.stan@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ionut.g.stan@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.21 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ionut.g.stan@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.218.21 mail-bw0-f21.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.218.21] ([209.85.218.21:39249] helo=mail-bw0-f21.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id F9/CA-09584-A13CB494 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:51:55 -0500
Received: by bwz14 with SMTP id 14so3047041bwz.23
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:51:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from
         :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=ano63WjB36SDHWYlrOychz7UAaEcePJZEYhIa2UvUpY=;
        b=RB77pG2TJt5uJyVFHVzA28LFP1Gi6TrzOJKHrQUE7R+L4g3Awj0J6U7Rp9oUeNt4KB
         DkJwwxMGv+JJONmZgvAJ7Xnx19941aLY9HjF/+bLTTnbCJ8nJfbkclCsRiKItSAC9GT/
         23xFC6Xvi96nWW87VVYCCYIRw6/x/uDcYdwfk=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject
         :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=IW07qWPdSRJ6d8shW/OOYvxhCZh8O8KbYQHbCP3DPurn+X6XZezD/4pDogZKN4il4n
         OSADilt6XnOgje4IPWqwiZbhy9nowOTyCezumPEjvLyxxOJUYjH/aIAzDgLItSgxdvBD
         Aiilj2kNCZeWoi5GmButsChCweit+yG/pcQXM=
Received: by 10.103.1.5 with SMTP id d5mr1284597mui.29.1229701911998;
        Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:51:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?10.0.0.187? (mail.cmbtravel.ro [84.234.105.22])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 12sm4423371muq.54.2008.12.19.07.51.50
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:51:51 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <494BC2AE.3060606@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:50:06 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20081204 Thunderbird/3.0b1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: viroteck@viroteck.net
CC: PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <69.22.48223.7E389494@pb1.pair.com> <494ACEAE.2090700@gmail.com>	 <494AD2AF.9000702@gmail.com>	 <2dedb8a0812181823q53a3b464oc1e2e2bd37792f98@mail.gmail.com>	 <b19eae4e0812190538x6600d8eexc7ab2c10ce0fd40f@mail.gmail.com>	 <494BB04C.40603@gmail.com>	 <98b8086f0812190640l6a2dd6bcm179031e36a50a122@mail.gmail.com>	 <b19eae4e0812190650w72d990e3s2e9d7802bfe32891@mail.gmail.com>	 <98b8086f0812190718x1783be2dy869d1b2240f0a72@mail.gmail.com>	 <b19eae4e0812190738l7dad9babs63ececd3e7ac50c3@mail.gmail.com> <b19eae4e0812190739x5eb2bb39r659b4fac524b5c13@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <b19eae4e0812190739x5eb2bb39r659b4fac524b5c13@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Q on Primitives
From: ionut.g.stan@gmail.com (Ionut Gabriel Stan)

On 12/19/2008 17:39, Robin Burchell wrote:
> Ugh. Apparantly I forgot to CC the list on those last two mails..
> Sorry. Pasted so others stay in on the conversation:
>
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 3:18 PM, troels knak-nielsen<troelskn@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> <snip>
> That's an interesting mail, expresses a viewpoint I hadn't considered,
> so, thanks for that.
>
> However: If PHP provides such a set in stone opinion on how things
> should be done, then why does it support, for example, provide class
> vs functional programming paradigms - both to a first degree level?
> (the mysqli extension is a very good example of what I mean here).
>
> As I have seen it, PHP is one of the best of all tools: it provides
> the features that many different programmers wish to use, and allows
> them to use it. It doesn't restrict itself to any single spectrum of
> programming, and I think that robustness is one reason it has
> flourished, and continues to do so well into the future.
>
> I see this as just another logical extension of that philosophy: you
> see this as being "not the PHP way", whilst I see it as the polar
> opposite: enabling programmers to do things as they wish, which I have
> always thought was very much the PHP way :)
>
>
> ------------
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Nathan Rixham<nrixham@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> because all of those current declarations would no longer work on the new
>> version of php which implemented such change..? and I'm assuming it would be
>> a much bigger change to the php internals than adding in an optional type
>> after the method params..?
>
> They would continue to work, because (you seem to be missing this
> point of what I am suggesting) - 'function' would just mean a return
> of a variant type (i.e. the current behaviour of not caring what it
> is, and not touching it in any way
>
> Whether or not it is a large change I am not qualified to suggest; I
> haven't yet done too extensive a digging into the internals.
>

Actually functional programming [1] is a different beast than what you
are referring to, which is called procedural programming [2]. In that
regard, a database interface like mysqli is hardly functional.

Sorry if I've hijacked the discussion somehow.


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_programming
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_programming