Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52862
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.170 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:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=qU5+3W1H19wiISR6aYtLmNqB40LPJPBYGRwqBgwErAsSKmGnGX9LqhmVccf/q2n9p1
         CPDcDhE/XemtpQvT7rL6uxXC0NJ1Oe9m3mpF60myZRl3Jq5MemIVwURCDE07svIWmLx5
         aqe7ncTJzEwzCT7NYYTpBBk3kQCmXIj5Xet9k=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinCjPJTsKvUiFdXJQG4EB668Me_+g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=1XwcGhy8UP_9gtkxGX-PqDfwxVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinCjPJTsKvUiFdXJQG4EB668Me_+g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:27:28 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTinemhsVsDM6eFzpB9vh6x-bbLdS_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierrick Charron <pierrick@webstart.fr>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e68972307eb0e604a4cde0a1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Enum
From: dhaarbrink@gmail.com (Dennis Haarbrink)

--0016e68972307eb0e604a4cde0a1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

As soon as I have my requested write permission in the rfc namespace i will
update it.

--
Dennis Haarbrink


2011/6/3 Pierrick Charron <pierrick@webstart.fr>

> Hi,
>
> The RFC was supposed to be a draft (i didn't really added it in the good
> section) and was written more to introduce the idea and make people think
> about it.
> Feel free to update it with any idea, concern you may have.
>
> Pierrick
>
>
> On 3 June 2011 03:26, Dennis Haarbrink <dhaarbrink@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One thing I would really like to see in 5.4 is enums.
>> There is already an RFC for that: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/enum
>>
>> This was discussed in february this year, but no consensus was reached.
>> IIRC, the most notable problems were:
>> - What is the 'value' of enum constant: string or int, user defined
>> scalar,
>> defaults
>> - Ability to make enums more 'class like', some people wanted to be able
>> to
>> add methods.
>>
>> Another thing which was discussed (and I think most people agreed on
>> that),
>> but is not in the RFC: type hinting in method signatures.
>>
>>
>> I think we should keep this simple proposal simple, let it be an enum in
>> all
>> its simplicity.
>> The toughest part would be to decide what would be the default value. Some
>> proposed to use the name of the constant, which is imho best for
>> debuggability (i like this one the best), or an auto incrementing int,
>> saying that it is better performance wise and which is more analog with
>> mysql's enum type.
>>
>>
>> So, to sum up:
>> - Do we really need enum level methods?
>> - Need to reach consensus on default values (strings vs auto inc. ints)
>> - RFC needs to be updated, explaining the type hinting of enums in method
>> signatures
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dennis Haarbrink
>>
>
>

--0016e68972307eb0e604a4cde0a1--