Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:63583
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: "Devis Lucato" <devis@lucato.it>, "Christian Schneider"
 <cschneid@cschneid.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <712F4499-949C-4C6F-A142-736A1B156189@gmail.com>
 <A5150B35-16CC-4872-A4C8-76C0BBF496D0@gmail.com>
 <CAET_qdMhkxAqzJCcmiSQRH=YwJQVwik_2JjXDbdfiSYGgpZMbw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 17:22:08 +0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <op.wmi526koc9evq2@nikita-desktop>
In-Reply-To: <CAET_qdMhkxAqzJCcmiSQRH=YwJQVwik_2JjXDbdfiSYGgpZMbw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.02 (Linux)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Generics proposal
From: inefedor@gmail.com ("Nikita Nefedov")

I actually don't have much experience with generics, so won't argue about  
their readability, but this article is all about Java's implementation of  
generics, so I don't know how much sense this article gives in that  
context.
But it's ok, I see just one person that supported proposal. I think case  
closed.

> I see what you are trying to achieve, but I hope this will never make  
> into
> PHP mainly for impact on readability.  I'd like to quote Eric Armstrong,  
> a
> passionate Java/Ruby dev:
>
>> I decry their very existence. They are the ultimate condemnation of
> static
>> type checking--because their very addition has virtually destroyed both
> the
>> readability and elegance of the language.
>> To make my case, let's start with a quasi-mathematical definition of
> "elegance".
>> In my view, elegance is a function of power and simplicity. Power is
> measured
>> by how much you can do. Simplicity is the inverse of the number of
> characters
>> it takes to achieve the result. So more power with fewer characters
> equals
>> "elegance"
>
> http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=299081
__________________

> I question the "need to validate" types part. I'd say you're better off  
> using a completely different language if you want to use strong typing.  
> For PHP: Embrace duck typing, write less boiler-plate code (thus  
> reducing the need for "smart" IDE) and be happy :-)

We have typehints, that was my point here.

> That's the same as saying you can ignore most of the C++ feature and  
> that will make it a simple language. That's neither true for developers  
> nor users of the language.

PHP now is multi-paradigm language (isn't it), so... yep, that's the same  
:)

> 1) Makes language harder to maintain as there is more (and more complex)  
> code implementing it.
> 2) Makes documentation bigger so users have first to figure out what  
> part to read and what part to ignore.
> 3) Makes it harder to write portable user-land libraries as the  
> application and the different libraries might use different (clashing)  
> paradigms. See error codes vs. exceptions as an example of this.
> 4) Makes it harder to have extensions like APC as they have to implement  
> more features.
> 5) Makes it harder to write alternative implementations.

All this points are also applicable to namespaces, [abstract,final]  
classes, interfaces, traits, access modifiers (instead of using `var`),  
etc.
If you would have said, this points in the context of... say... necessity  
of that feature, then yeah, maybe you would be right.

Anyway, as long as almost no one didn't supported, I think we can close  
this discussion.