Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:80606
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.169 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: marcio3w@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <54B85C2B.9000901@gmail.com>
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>
 <6105ea99002e634373c09685310e26a6@mail.gmail.com> <D39D18B9-A9E5-430E-B00A-E0DE03DAFE8C@ajf.me>
 <e131f1aaf3ae0491f958171df36211f5@mail.gmail.com> <85F6139E-6332-4645-91B8-C852B07EA62A@ajf.me>
 <12433808-9D62-48D3-B66E-74572C61BF68@zend.com> <CALW=WEAzvXde8J6iQ9msG34P7Ukhq6qQONEDvzW+duNSTP-FSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOsHV+tWaDZP-ZzxQs5XZb2rYvuSNnHW1+tcURKjsMJceps8NQ@mail.gmail.com> <54B85C2B.9000901@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 21:47:31 -0300
Message-ID: <CAOsHV+tqOEz5mTZJOqqu_esrRVsQxPQh-eEPYV+6uRv4-NQiyw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Cc: Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com>, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, 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
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Scalar Type Hints v0.2
From: marcio.web2@gmail.com (Marcio Almada)

Stanislav Malyshev,

> I would rather have int $num for coercive typing - given that close to
> 100% of existing typed functions - namely internal functions - mean
> exactly that and are actually documented with this exact syntax.
> [...]
> As for strict, maybe it can be int! $num or something like that. I'm not
> exactly supporting it, but out of what I have seen this would make the
> most sense for me - it expresses the intent pretty clearly ("give me
> int! or else!" :) and does not conflict with existing stuff.

The hole point (at least for me) for being against `function bar(int
$num){}` to achieve type coercion is that the syntactic equivalent
code `function bar(array $numbers){}` won't do any coercion - (array)
$numbers - because BC break would be too big to handle.

Having `int|integer|bool|float|real|string` as coercive type hints
while `array` is "strict" looks like an ugly hack (no pun intended).



2015-01-15 21:32 GMT-03:00 Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>:
> Hi!
>
>>> 1. Strict
>>> function bar(int $num){}
>>>
>>> 2. Lax
>>> function bar((int) $num){}
>
> I would rather have int $num for coercive typing - given that close to
> 100% of existing typed functions - namely internal functions - mean
> exactly that and are actually documented with this exact syntax. Yes,
> there are some functions that do strict, but those are in most cases are
> either close to bugs which nobody cares to fix since it's so narrow a
> case or some very special cases of some complex API where type matters
> for API-specific reasons.
>
> As for strict, maybe it can be int! $num or something like that. I'm not
> exactly supporting it, but out of what I have seen this would make the
> most sense for me - it expresses the intent pretty clearly ("give me
> int! or else!" :) and does not conflict with existing stuff.
>
> Putting it on the table as a brainstorming exercise.
>
> --
> Stas Malyshev
> smalyshev@gmail.com