Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:44654 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 56556 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2009 14:17:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Jul 2009 14:17:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ilia@ilia.ws; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ilia@ilia.ws; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ilia.ws designates 72.14.220.155 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ilia@ilia.ws X-Host-Fingerprint: 72.14.220.155 fg-out-1718.google.com Received: from [72.14.220.155] ([72.14.220.155:29130] helo=fg-out-1718.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 2E/C8-16153-271CC4A4 for ; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:17:23 -0400 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 13so1141701fge.0 for ; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.83.17 with SMTP id g17mr254931fgb.25.1246544239275; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.169? (TOROON63-1176059019.sdsl.bell.ca [70.25.60.139]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4sm5438789fge.3.2009.07.02.07.17.17 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:17:18 -0700 (PDT) Cc: Lukas Kahwe Smith , PHP Internals , Derick Rethans , Stanislav Malyshev , Hannes Magnusson Message-ID: <908D3504-7A97-4D2B-BEB3-12703D856BD6@ilia.ws> To: Paul Biggar In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:17:14 -0400 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Flexible type hinting From: ilia@ilia.ws (Ilia Alshanetsky) On 2-Jul-09, at 10:02 AM, Paul Biggar wrote: > On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: >> Paul's proposal is some part does not make sense because it allows >> weak type >> hinting, which should not be used if you need type hinting. The >> whole idea >> about type hinting is definition of strict interfaces, not loosely >> based >> one. That's just my opinion, which admittedly I feel fairly >> strongly about. > > No, the idea of type hinting is that you hint to the user about what > type the interface expects. You have implemented "strong type > checking" instead. I wonder that you cannot see the conflict between > the term "type hinting" and "strict interfaces". I would be happier if > you renamed your patch "optional strong scalar type checking", which > is what it is. That's a fair statement I suppose.