Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:58279 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 60149 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2012 21:31:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Feb 2012 21:31:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=kris.craig@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=kris.craig@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: kris.craig@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 74.125.82.170 mail-we0-f170.google.com Received: from [74.125.82.170] ([74.125.82.170:49233] helo=mail-we0-f170.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id F1/A4-36673-6A74D4F4 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:31:19 -0500 Received: by werh12 with SMTP id h12so2023495wer.29 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:31:15 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of kris.craig@gmail.com designates 10.180.80.40 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.180.80.40; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of kris.craig@gmail.com designates 10.180.80.40 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kris.craig@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=kris.craig@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.180.80.40]) by 10.180.80.40 with SMTP id o8mr41946174wix.10.1330464675900 (num_hops = 1); Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:31:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ggjzYE+3uYg2p8LZAhVY+4mlZoXksGYL9mFnanDIZ1c=; b=IEgbwG8n51pqUGYLRP5VVZPcEO/10fWvcuCeqX8uf2nfDzf/9T5Otzp0CsT47ftAFJ HEl9RGnrjnkcifa1ZXm0gFron6B/fnvNOEbpPmnokNRLwoJZDhYtfFqVcEIkWahejpZT 5ucy8PbyNaxfgfff5Ypk9XTV2wxVfcMgF4xCg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.80.40 with SMTP id o8mr33240987wix.10.1330464675823; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:31:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.75.146 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:31:15 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1330357150.2159.30.camel@guybrush> <4F4C1324.2040905@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:31:15 -0800 Message-ID: To: John Crenshaw Cc: Anthony Ferrara , "internals@lists.php.net" , Arvids Godjuks , Michael Morris , Lazare Inepologlou Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04428b8e6381ba04ba0cf2be Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Scalar type hinting From: kris.craig@gmail.com (Kris Craig) --f46d04428b8e6381ba04ba0cf2be Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I could setup a repo on Github for this if anyone thinks that would be helpful? --Kris On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:05 PM, John Crenshaw wrote: > Yeah, I proposed this the other day. We need to go through the hundreds of > historical emails on the subject and consolidate all the information into a > central document outlining all the information that has been developed over > the years. Lots of benefits to this. If multiple people want to participate > in this process we can probably partition it by date ranges. > > John Crenshaw > Priacta, Inc. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Anthony Ferrara [mailto:ircmaxell@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 3:15 PM > To: Kris Craig > Cc: internals@lists.php.net; Arvids Godjuks; Michael Morris; Lazare > Inepologlou > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Scalar type hinting > > Can I make a suggestion? Instead of an rfc, can we collate the existing > discussion into an easier to digest format (historical as well). Summarize > the conversations and existing rfcs with the discussion around them > (including the pros/cons and problems). That way we have a point of > reference and comparison with which to base the rfc on, and a way to judge > and rate the rfc... > > Anthony > On Feb 28, 2012 3:09 PM, "Kris Craig" wrote: > > > @Michael Would you be willing to delay that? Rather than create a > > bunch of new RFC's, I was thinking it might be better if all > > interested parties came together on some other communication medium > > and worked on a single, collaborative RFC instead. > > > > --Kris > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Michael Morris > > > >wrote: > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Now I'm going to go work up a detailed RFC for what I posted earlier > > > with some additional clarification as to when errors should and > > > shouldn't be thrown. > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM, John Crenshaw > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > OK everyone, it seems that some people have forgotten or missed > > > > the > > > original agreement that this thread started with. There is a > > communication > > > disconnect ("strict typing" means horribly different things to > > > different people right now). Please read through and understand the > > > following terminology before continuing to post on this thread. > > > We've agreed to the following terms: > > > > > > > > - "Strict Typing" means the super strict old C style typing *with > > > > no > > > implicit conversions*. (If you really think this is what you want, > > > you > > are > > > probably mistaken. Look through prior discussions on this topic. > > > This > > fails > > > for numerous reasons, including the fact that almost every input to > > > PHP > > is > > > a string.) > > > > - "Weak Typing" means types in the same sense that the PHP > > documentation > > > uses types (for example, the docs indicate substr(string, integer), > > > and substr(12345, "2") == "345".) (If you think you want "strict > > > typing", > > this > > > is probably what you mean.) > > > > - "No Scalar Typing" should be used to indicate the current system > > > (where there is no provision for hinting at scalar types.) > > > > > > > > In addition, if someone potentially new expresses support for > > > > "Strict > > > Typing", please assume that they really mean weak typing unless > > > proven otherwise (this is by far the more likely intent.) Don't get > > > mean, > > politely > > > clarify terminology so that everyone can be on the same page. If > > > someone still insists that they want "Strict Typing" (as defined > > > above), point > > them > > > to the prior discussions on the topic which explain exactly what the > > > problems with this are. > > > > > > > > John Crenshaw > > > > Priacta, Inc. > > > > > > -- > > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, > > > visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > > > > --f46d04428b8e6381ba04ba0cf2be--