Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81572
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain devilix.net designates 209.85.218.48 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <063B69C3-B878-40F6-A202-6735CB37A5FB@ajf.me>
References: <8DCD1B72-C81D-499E-B455-E4A042CD76E6@ajf.me>
	<B0C5801F-7D46-4CB0-9B2E-AF18C44DAF14@ajf.me>
	<CA+9eiLtPVoDYT71fYrZfxPk6a_m7ErFd2w8UBvu9ZeTEbnm4kA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1E54E93F-8CE1-469F-BE1F-DD2F1DF76E39@ajf.me>
	<CAPhkiZxfUie8DYQi4roWhq9mRnRooZnf1_4b4xOi2ruz4UG=jQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<063B69C3-B878-40F6-A202-6735CB37A5FB@ajf.me>
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 11:12:06 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPhkiZxxDTqpuV0mUuOqyWJfBi9O6reuSDGpM9h0xuA83J-fqg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.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: narf@devilix.net (Andrey Andreev)

Hi Andrea,

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrey,
>
>> On 2 Feb 2015, at 08:55, Andrey Andreev <narf@devilix.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>>> Hi Dmitry,
>>>
>>>> On 2 Feb 2015, at 07:02, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As I already told, in my opinion, version 0.1 was the perfect solution that
>>>> fit into PHP semantic very well.
>>>
>>> I don't like the original. Weak types work to a degree, but they don't fulfill the use case of a lot of developers, and consequently the RFC wasn't too popular outside internals.
>>
>> I still think that caller-controlled "strict mode" doesn't fulfill
>> that use case either.
>
> How doesn't it? It doesn't force the model upon your users, sure, but something like that is never going to get past internals anyway.
>

We already had a long exchange of arguments on this, there's no point
in repeating them. But if you're concerned about it getting approved
by internals ... is there anybody on internals supporting this version
of it? I might've missed a mail or two, but so far I've seen only
criticism.

Cheers,
Andrey.