Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:80516
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.176 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <F3BC55CD-38CD-42B7-AE0B-A6D34E3D3875@ajf.me>
References: <8DCD1B72-C81D-499E-B455-E4A042CD76E6@ajf.me>
	<CAPwsocGyv7dp8n=_E1QfrXRSbYZXcHZAPk5F=hDLB070i=SCGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E2073DE-0951-498C-97BB-DDAC094F11FA@ajf.me>
	<9a033dd1f223f854e760924d118ab812@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKUjMCU-57cDpG5ZbDGv10dSqx=Ey40D-WbKxKSnC6oSYOfLWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<2ae0164cb9b9bf1c974d7a3c60af0466@mail.gmail.com>
	<F3BC55CD-38CD-42B7-AE0B-A6D34E3D3875@ajf.me>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 08:26:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CAB6YZuzuoxg+=zL49wv3-eyWCRCKij1q_BG0e0pFYdy5HhSTqQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>, Richard Quadling <RQuadling@gmail.com>, Leigh <leight@gmail.com>, 
	PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Scalar Type Hints v0.2
From: pajousek@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pavel_Kou=C5=99il?=)

> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
> From what I can see, the larger PHP community is generally in favour of s=
trict typing, and among them, the previous RFC revision was received quite =
poorly. Myself, I might have been somewhat happy with just weak hints, but =
it would upset an awful lot of developers who would like some measure of st=
rict typing. Developers who would most likely not use the new scalar type h=
ints, because they weren=E2=80=99t strict. And if nobody uses them, why add=
 them?

Actually, what's the big difference, making weak typing worse and less
useable? The people who write libraries are guaranteed either way that
the input parameters for their methods will be of desired type in both
cases. And the people who use them either can do the conversion
themselves (in strong typing case) or let the language help with it
for them (in weak typing case) - which is IMHO fine, as long as the
conversions are kinda predictable and 100% documented.

And yesterday I was pointed out one thing: the RFC states "With this
approach, an argument is only accepted if its type is exactly the same
as the parameter.". Does this mean you cannot pass integer to a
function with float argument in the strict mode?

Is it strong or strict, btw? I always thought it's supposed to be
"strongly typed", but since I saw "strict typing" here used by
everyone, I'm not sure now.

Pavel Kouril