Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81587 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 33396 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2015 14:25:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Feb 2015 14:25:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=markus@fischer.name; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=markus@fischer.name; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain fischer.name from 62.179.121.33 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: markus@fischer.name X-Host-Fingerprint: 62.179.121.33 fep13.mx.upcmail.net Solaris 10 (beta) Received: from [62.179.121.33] ([62.179.121.33:48566] helo=fep13.mx.upcmail.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id CB/60-30366-3C88FC45 for ; Mon, 02 Feb 2015 09:25:08 -0500 Received: from edge02.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.237]) by viefep13-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.8.01.05.13 201-2260-151-135-20130320) with ESMTP id <20150202142504.XSZ12567.viefep13-int.chello.at@edge02.upcmail.net> for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2015 15:25:04 +0100 Received: from mail02.home ([213.47.1.174]) by edge02.upcmail.net with edge id nSR11p00s3lFLNl01SR1fc; Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:25:02 +0100 X-SourceIP: 213.47.1.174 Received: from mail02.home ([192.168.1.14] helo=lv426.local) by mail02.home with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1YIHvy-00083I-0t for internals@lists.php.net; Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:25:03 +0100 Message-ID: <54CF88BD.7050405@fischer.name> Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:25:01 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <8DCD1B72-C81D-499E-B455-E4A042CD76E6@ajf.me> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "scanner01.home", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hello Andrea, On 02.02.15 00:49, Andrea Faulds wrote: > The RFC has been updated to cover return types, since Levi’s Return Types RFC has passed. The patch is a work in progress: it works, but lacks tests for return types. > > Version 0.3 of the RFC can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/scalar_type_hints [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Scalar Type Hints v0.2 From: markus@fischer.name (Markus Fischer) Hello Andrea, On 02.02.15 00:49, Andrea Faulds wrote: > The RFC has been updated to cover return types, since Levi’s Return Types RFC has passed. The patch is a work in progress: it works, but lacks tests for return types. > > Version 0.3 of the RFC can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/scalar_type_hints although my involvement here is very sparse at the moment, please let me tell you that I a) find it great that you don't give up, are persistently going for your idea while b) still being objective rather then emotional. I'm really happy to see such technical, lively discussion you initiated so far. Thank you :-) That said ... - I dislike the RFC since the introduction of the declare() adaption (effectively 0.2/0.3 now) and did not 100% agree with 0.1 - Since consensus on the strict mode does part the community (or, the greater community also outside @internals) my impression is that the current best way to move forward would be - get the rfc to only go for weak types for now - using the "cast-like syntax": function foo( (int) $bar ); and ultimately keep the strict type out for /now/ and try it at a later time, the "function foo( int $bar )"-syntax. I'm actually not really in favor of just weak types, I would consider myself a "strict type" voter, but through the community communication here I saw a) the benefits of weak types hinting/casting b) without getting in the way of a possible future strict type (e.g. with the "non-cast-like syntax"). thank you, - Markus