Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:73802
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1398437995.20097.110370617.51C52C36@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References: <CAFMT4NoUZ7==rmLtuohHrddNnurOe-quPL9q_=WbdNV+jo1kYA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMyk_AYNCTQDqycU=-DU8EOtZn-Sgm1uKStkOgvdP7aCn31kfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFMT4NpMPCxvnPm+UAqLEKjmHLJ9t0zhwKAkVbZ=a9nv2ECaGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1398437995.20097.110370617.51C52C36@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:10:30 -0600
Message-ID: <CAFMT4NqdEZv95tVe2SSOoa1FhUSDFbXi9Mw3q+SAdT-SPN62Sg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Will Fitch <willfitch@php.net>
Cc: Lazare Inepologlou <linepogl@gmail.com>, internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e015387024f509604f7e46529
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Return Type Declarations
From: morrison.levi@gmail.com (Levi Morrison)

--089e015387024f509604f7e46529
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Will Fitch <willfitch@php.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014, at 07:52 AM, Levi Morrison wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Lazare Inepologlou
> > <linepogl@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > 2014-04-24 17:59 GMT+02:00 Levi Morrison <levim@php.net>:
> > >
> > > My dear Internals friends,
> > >>
> > >> I have spent the last month drafting an RFC that allows return types:
> > >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/returntypehinting
> > >>
> > >> Notable items:
> > >>   -  Differences from past RFCs are summarized in the RFC:
> > >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/returntypehinting#differences_from_past_rfcs
> > >>   - The patch includes basic opcache and reflection support. It also
> has
> > >> phpt tests.
> > >>   - Informal performance tests indicate that the patch did not fubar
> > >> performance; if desired a more detailed test can be conducted before
> > >> voting.
> > >>   - This RFC does not add, modify, or remove keywords at all; this
> notably
> > >> excludes type-hints for scalars. Supporting scalar type declarations
> is
> > >> outside the scope of this RFC; if you are interested in supporting
> scalar
> > >> type declarations please discuss it elsewhere.
> > >>
> > >> As a friendly reminder, everyone on this list is interested in
> developing
> > >> a
> > >> better PHP and the definitions of 'better' vary from person to person.
> > >> Please be civil and constructive while discussing this RFC. Thank you!
> > >>
> > >> Some thanks, regardless if the RFC is accepted:
> > >>   - For providing a patch: Joe Watkins.
> > >>   - For helping me iterate on RFC drafts: Bob Wienand, Nikita Popov
> and
> > >> Anthony Ferrara
> > >>   - For previous RFCs on this topic: Felipe Pena and Will Fitch. I
> gleaned
> > >> valuable knowledge from your proposals and the discussion around them.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > This is a nice and well thought proposal.
> > >
> > > I would like to suggest the addition of the "self" and "static" pseudo
> > > types. Most IDEs support this through @return syntax:
> > >
> > > class Foo {
> > >   /** @return static */
> > >   public function SetBar( $bar ) {
> > >      // ...
> > >      return $this;
> > >   }
> > > }
> > >
> > > With the new syntax, the above could be transformed into this:
> > >
> > > class Foo {
> > >   public function SetBar( $bar ) : static {
> > >      // ...
> > >      return $this;
> > >   }
> > > }
> > >
> >
> > As the patch currently stands you can use the type-hint 'self'.
>
> How will this patch work with LSB?
>

Late static binding is not a feature I am very familiar with. After some
investigation it appears that we curently don't support late static binding
on parameters; this means that I will not support late static binding on
returns either. I want to keep the impact as small as possible.

--089e015387024f509604f7e46529--