Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:44859
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.220 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:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=kOf4n9N3Vi6/CA63FYaXkqL/lk8u5JbQcEWXMHv7AzmgxrIDdoc768uXf0Zxz4xI+M
         3rJc7xo2J+8KdfiuMSCsEhu7ObovngbSOWyKiml6JhxFtq2C9gyN2fj2VFacMUDaxxyi
         l1Y6RjWUZUctH8lT4VnbR53xGvyMIXJZ6bwaI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20090709121921.0ae17d58@zend.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20090708224156.0ac5a438@zend.com> <af54caaf0907090139q23a5574fscdcf29321c7f8f0e@mail.gmail.com> 
	<7.0.1.0.2.20090709121921.0ae17d58@zend.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 11:18:18 +0100
Message-ID: <af54caaf0907090318t60ad02e2ne9d8617df3daa827@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Type hinting - Request for Discussion
From: paul.biggar@gmail.com (Paul Biggar)

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Zeev Suraski<zeev@zend.com> wrote:
> I believe that
> if we had a 'clean' Weak typing RFC as well as a Strict typing RFC, each
> with its pros and cons - there would be very different results.
>
> The two approaches were never compared head-to-head, with the pros and cons
>
> Another is that the difference between the
> two approaches, as well as the issues with strict typing - aren't fully
> understood by the audience - and I believe that this is actually the case.
>
> the
> discussion missed key ingredients, we should discuss it further.

I think you are right that the discussions weren't sufficiently clear,
and this could be resolved by better RFCs. This is obviously how it
should have been done in the first place (look at the success of
Python's PEPs).

I'm not sure this will change things, and worry it might derail what
we have now, but those are not good reasons to stop the discussion.


Thanks,
Paul


-- 
Paul Biggar
paul.biggar@gmail.com