Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:58191
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.170 as permitted sender)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of kris.craig@gmail.com designates 10.180.99.7 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.180.99.7;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1330373303.2159.51.camel@guybrush>
References: <CAG=uTXEfTBqX7n0_zfGjB_txQFKtZXF4MOo6RHHPSRPerGeKZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKOpQSwP_VXazO1WgQgOWiKTmgiwzorg2=ii+Mdz58a=TKs6VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGovj_O5UQx9aAaYg302i-kKp13CtBKNLmQ48OLHNvk61rM1sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<41055a3dd36db02d3d09012231787a8d.squirrel@www.l-i-e.com>
	<4F4BB316.6080600@gmail.com>
	<2b2726ae802163c88909a8e4e161d246.squirrel@www.l-i-e.com>
	<1330369748.2159.49.camel@guybrush>
	<op.wacsq5c7idpuyk@damnation.mshome.net>
	<1330373303.2159.51.camel@guybrush>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:54:33 -0800
Message-ID: <CAKOpQSxzW3=ReXb7fmXF7z4WaXMGxtYzrPfUBDR3wvPGKU7j9g@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?= <johannes@schlueters.de>
Cc: Gustavo Lopes <glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt>, Richard Lynch <ceo@l-i-e.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0418280446f2fb04b9f85163
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Scalar type hinting
From: kris.craig@gmail.com (Kris Craig)

--f46d0418280446f2fb04b9f85163
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm not sure what the precedent is for creating a separate list fork for a
specific topic.  Can one of you who knows the answer to that respond to
Richard's suggestion?

As for an RFC, I completely agree.  However, it's still a bit too vague to
create an RFC that would be of any value.  We at least have to brainstorm
conceptually where we want to go before an RFC could serve any purpose IMHO=
.

--Kris


2012/2/27 Johannes Schl=FCter <johannes@schlueters.de>

> On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 21:05 +0100, Gustavo Lopes wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:09:08 +0100, Johannes Schl=FCter
> > <johannes@schlueters.de> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 13:05 -0600, Richard Lynch wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I'd have to come up with some OTHER scenario not involving fatal
> > >> error, such as:
> > >>
> > >> strict $db =3D new DB();
> > >
> > > The example is wrong. The new operator will always return an instance
> of
> > > the given class (or there will be an exception).
> > > [...]
> >
> >
> > This is not true. The new operator can return NULL. In fact, the intl
> > extension uses this extensively:
>
> ok, internal stuff can do everything it wants. But it shouldn't. Doing
> that is really bad and I wasn't aware of that case. :-)
>
> And since it's bad another example should be used :-)
>
> johannes
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--f46d0418280446f2fb04b9f85163--