Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:67984
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.139 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <51CCA1C6.20702@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 13:34:14 -0700
Organization: SugarCRM
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>
CC: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAAyV7nGo4+n_4Ad7oKyuvLWTtmnui7fn6s-noCwG2PtT5A70tQ@mail.gmail.com> <51C9FA9C.8050403@sugarcrm.com> <CAAyV7nHz0E2Tmin5_S4OVii=U1HhuKKL6y_KAa+j=X7DT9My6g@mail.gmail.com> <51CA1C93.6080500@sugarcrm.com> <CAAyV7nHo-ZLx2F=+6URctZXTqx8tLgR=xG7j0wJ3unmiCxGvXQ@mail.gmail.com> <51CA24C5.9090505@sugarcrm.com> <CAAyV7nG2Lmo0q01KGbKpBzpJXbs-2E+1ir8yCOFnN8yC-Up2Gw@mail.gmail.com> <51CB167A.4020207@sugarcrm.com> <CAAyV7nHWJYkB0sFWNep=QJqVX7+QsKJ-ne=rD7Qszs98DDx3aA@mail.gmail.com> <51CC73E2.5070201@sugarcrm.com> <CAAyV7nFOfug-cqzBtVhchc8gji0vfE9i1TE=b=V_e5T1y-j93g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAyV7nFOfug-cqzBtVhchc8gji0vfE9i1TE=b=V_e5T1y-j93g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Protocol Type Hinting
From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev)

Hi!

> No, my point was that you pulled the card "those languages don't have
> these structural typing thigns". And I showed one reason they don't.

Sorry, it was you who pulled the card of "other dynamic languages have
duck typing". I have showed that what other dynamic languages have and
what they call duck typing, PHP has too, and has had since forever. What
you call duck typing is completely different and no non-statically-typed
language, as far as I can see, has it at all. You can argue PHP should
be a first dynamic typing language in the world to feature this kind of
type checking, but when you say "In fact most other dynamic languages
use this as the basis for their OOP system" - you can not use this to
support your proposal, because what they are doing is very different
from what you are doing, and in fact none of them are doing what you are
doing at all.

> All I know is what I experience and the experiences of those that I talk
> to. I have seen the usefulness here. And I know others have (they
> have expressed it here and in other channels).

The only thing left is to move from "I see the usefuless" to "I can show
the usefulness to others in a convincing way".

> It's something that community leaders like us have to do. Branch out and
> realize that our own perceptions and viewpoints are going to
> be naturally biased by our experiences. And that's why
> I suggested reaching out to other community maintainers for some insight
> into what problems they face.

Great. Please do reach out and provide some insight of what problems
require such approach and why. So far the best argument I have seen for
this proposal is that it allows to convert E_ERROR to
E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR. I don't think it's nearly enough for introducing a
new and unprecedented typing system into the language.

-- 
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227