Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49409 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 13275 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2010 07:18:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 Aug 2010 07:18:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=zeev@zend.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=zeev@zend.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 212.25.124.185 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: zeev@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.25.124.185 il-mr1.zend.com Received: from [212.25.124.185] ([212.25.124.185:42118] helo=il-mr1.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C8/E3-23169-250A36C4 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 03:18:44 -0400 Received: from il-gw1.zend.com (unknown [10.1.1.21]) by il-mr1.zend.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9E3150476; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:18:24 +0300 (IDT) Received: from LAP-ZEEV.zend.com ([10.1.20.51]) by il-gw1.zend.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:18:38 +0300 Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20100812101748.124c0e48@zend.com> Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20100812083543.0f7153e0@zend.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:18:37 +0300 To: Josh Davis Cc: Johannes =?iso-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?= , Internals Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Aug 2010 07:18:39.0244 (UTC) FILETIME=[960A2CC0:01CB39EE] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Strict typing From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski) At 04:02 12/08/2010, Josh Davis wrote: >What would be interesting to see is what people think of Derick's >latest proposal allowing both the strict typechecking and the more >sensible "weak typing" There's nothing new about it, it's been on the table for around half a year now. Everyone who opposes strict typing on grounds that it's an alien feature to PHP(*) doesn't see any advantages in this suggestion, as everything that's bad in strict typing remains on the table. If there were only two options left on earth, strict typing and strict+auto-conversion, I'd vote for going with just strict. Zeev (*) http://wiki.php.net/rfc/typecheckingstrictandweak - 'Why is strict type checking problematic'