Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71348
Return-Path: <cryptocompress@googlemail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 30213 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2014 20:53:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 20 Jan 2014 20:53:38 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=cryptocompress@googlemail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=cryptocompress@googlemail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain googlemail.com designates 209.85.214.43 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: cryptocompress@googlemail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.43 mail-bk0-f43.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.214.43] ([209.85.214.43:34163] helo=mail-bk0-f43.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 85/09-02192-ECC8DD25 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 15:53:35 -0500
Received: by mail-bk0-f43.google.com with SMTP id mx11so1179315bkb.16
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 12:53:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=fEhuOc7MhyG0NF3gHGPDIYtKumSVImQ6/FvbhxXzcXs=;
        b=RPXXytVYPegbac4zjW3YLP4HN+aMMvaxZ/Q71QtpJEKnZ+2ZVsiif5TgwLmdy1irEE
         H4etchI53rakQKNu+V/4vf4hGZwIqzb1EbGk679wL2uj8LzWlO55ZyCdBENKjI+VajmT
         m8D0EYpRNhzNmM1do3XSQlTX6fQCaCx4BFYxqI4XAx+G1ulh6k6MUm3oaSW3iw8FQNI7
         ifnsDMPYxdAw29ndKoXgX1BMhV2326r7qL5wgpp3BHfM5bPLThe1GWV2YiSaRYd9xN9W
         QYA3cLL6/ZEBnH8VdB/voIUatYd1b6di6NT0Q0/LrnArVjLnslBB8pvefJvAVwLZuTPa
         XbjQ==
X-Received: by 10.205.88.1 with SMTP id ay1mr15990bkc.44.1390251211928;
        Mon, 20 Jan 2014 12:53:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.115] (mnch-5d85485c.pool.mediaWays.net. [93.133.72.92])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o11sm1956570bkg.13.2014.01.20.12.53.30
        for <internals@lists.php.net>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Mon, 20 Jan 2014 12:53:30 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <52DD8CBC.4040401@googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 21:53:16 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CABDNdAGCH5i9-=4Ys1CXeNaGWGmX=mkTiq0b7BbUKtBPdQ9XVg@mail.gmail.com>	<0B.B1.24763.139B7D25@pb1.pair.com>	<002001cf12da$2bfbda90$83f38fb0$@tutteli.ch>	<CAMUwpuRLfwru8XT64=j5LsNyG_DkwU_i0oHPHqfmn2HuLt+28A@mail.gmail.com>	<CAGAGxbZcj91m0DgBi8ZMBWw400nem+Xkt6VbFBxSVLYWYEC0VA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFRKLUNL_4Kyxe3HRs70Xgsiy4pKo0rsEnEyPCT80B7W20U6jQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAGAGxba2U0_pK0kXx-+N=34UJiLUd9ev-TNf=R+jMzzVRGzW3w@mail.gmail.com>	<CAL+t6cE5KxpfSny3pNyW1s-0v00ocC7g=ee6AKcxo1bYoBrKeg@mail.gmail.com>	<CABDNdAG60oWEkjRegE4qc6WE_KcJvv=uqtVPRzihm-42PRcgyg@mail.gmail.com>	<52DCA3E7.80602@lerdorf.com>	<52DCED71.3020207@pthreads.org>	<006301cf15f5$22f8df60$68ea9e20$@tutteli.ch>	<CABDNdAEbzu+J-GQ73_2ra-tuX3aTGDPxue4_gCXu3iOnQgGpvg@mail.gmail.com>	<CAESVnVp8wjeCXKA6g=0mNzj3E0sR2FKtNRrzL7zPgsEk71Em7w@mail.gmail.com>	<52DD77E8.8000800@ajf.me>	<CAAR7rTEKspoDFQNy8zz68v4GNN-AGUVLdp_AhJwOaQwzRQUZhA@mail.gmail.com> <CAESVnVreKN6paTPKf2bjDW9hORQ0op39u0_9FNGGwSfLAOc76g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAESVnVreKN6paTPKf2bjDW9hORQ0op39u0_9FNGGwSfLAOc76g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Introducing "Array Of" RFC
From: cryptocompress@googlemail.com (Crypto Compress)

Am 20.01.2014 20:55, schrieb Sara Golemon:
> Dictionary<int, string>[] foo  <-- Is that *really* what you want an
> array of int->string dictionaries to look like?  Really?

Yes, i like this clean separation between base/scalar types and 
generics. We can have this RFC *and* generics. Can't see any problems 
here. This is not critique of your work or generics!

Discussed performance penalty got in long time before this RFC: 
http://3v4l.org/os5Gg

The only thing to solve is the nullable-issue...

cryptocompress