Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:78630
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain tutteli.ch designates 80.74.154.78 as permitted sender)
To: "'Chris Wright'" <cw@daverandom.com>,
	"'Andrea Faulds'" <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: "'Stas Malyshev'" <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>,
	"'PHP Internals'" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <002601cff777$eb923430$c2b69c90$@tutteli.ch>	<CAFMT4NqJDcek6itqAUt2iOyHd2icc-tDdWsEjiRYvG1YFcc5cw@mail.gmail.com>	<000601cff80a$972e0250$c58a06f0$@tutteli.ch>	<5458937F.9020304@sugarcrm.com>	<0776A65F-D49A-4E8C-9771-6B5E5C4EA77E@ajf.me> <CAGAGxbYhQ5iHdXnNk3vj33iapzV2A5NoYtCct1-=wbUb-oN+wg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGAGxbYhQ5iHdXnNk3vj33iapzV2A5NoYtCct1-=wbUb-oN+wg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 13:17:32 +0100
Message-ID: <001d01cff829$5010a750$f031f5f0$@tutteli.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQHFXQsvCqySdhOS5hZldA9wwvCKZAF9M3/mAYp5CtcBNMNzSAEoQBf0AT4q8RqcMH654A==
Content-Language: de-ch
Subject: AW: AW: [PHP-DEV] Types on the right or on the left
From: php@tutteli.ch ("Robert Stoll")


> -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: are.you.winning@gmail.com [mailto:are.you.winning@gmail.com] Im =
Auftrag von Chris Wright
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. November 2014 12:51
> An: Andrea Faulds
> Cc: Stas Malyshev; Robert Stoll; PHP Internals
> Betreff: Re: AW: [PHP-DEV] Types on the right or on the left
>=20
> On 4 November 2014 10:32, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>=20
> >
> > > On 4 Nov 2014, at 08:51, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> =
wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree, this is not a very good situation. It would be much =
better
> > > to take a systematic approach to this, but this is impossible =
since
> > > there is no systematic approach to strict typing in PHP, just some
> > > pieces here and there. I think this is not right, but obviously =
many
> > > people here disagree and are happy to have the inconsistent =
syntax.
> > > I don't see why "public Foo function bar()" would be so much worse
> > > than "public function
> > > bar() : Foo"  but for some reason this possibility wasn't even
> > > considered as far as I can see.
> >
> I thought it was inconsistent, but after discussions on StackOverflow, =
I
> > don't think it actually is. Return types describe the return type of =
a
> > function, not the type of a function. So there's no reason they have
> > to go before the function name like parameter types do.
> >
> >
> So, in a sentence:
>=20
> In PHP, input types go on the left and output types go on the right.
>=20
> This sounds like a convention that could be established and followed, =
and no-one could reasonably call it inconsistent if it
> was adhered to.

That is an interesting thought. Yet, where would you put the type of an =
out parameter then? Nevertheless, you could phrase your convention =
differently so it makes more sense and  well..  in the end we can do =
whatever we like in PHP and call it xy-convention and the user will have =
to pick it up and learn it (quite similar to array functions where =
usually the first argument is array and suddenly it is not the first =
parameter as with array_key_exists, array_map or array_search). Sure it =
is no big deal, the user should be able to pick up the convention =
quickly but we could facilitate it, make it easier for the user, more =
intuitive, in order that the user has a steeper learning curve.  And the =
time to decide what direction PHP should take is now with PHP 7.