Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81595
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.200 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
In-Reply-To: <54CF88BD.7050405@fischer.name>
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 16:17:19 +0000
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <05215ABA-DB9D-4C0A-BAAA-938FF6B0EFAB@ajf.me>
References: <8DCD1B72-C81D-499E-B455-E4A042CD76E6@ajf.me> <B0C5801F-7D46-4CB0-9B2E-AF18C44DAF14@ajf.me> <54CF88BD.7050405@fischer.name>
To: Markus Fischer <markus@fischer.name>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Scalar Type Hints v0.2
From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds)

Hi Markus,

> On 2 Feb 2015, at 14:25, Markus Fischer <markus@fischer.name> wrote:
>=20
> - 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
>=20
> - get the rfc to only go for weak types for now
> - using the "cast-like syntax": function foo( (int) $bar );
>=20
> and ultimately keep the strict type out for /now/ and try it at a =
later
> time, the "function foo( int $bar )"-syntax.

I=E2=80=99m not sure that really works that well. It=E2=80=99s not a =
terribly good compromise: If you want strict typing, you not only =
haven=E2=80=99t got it, but even worse, you=E2=80=99ll be forced to deal =
with weak typing if you use the wrong library, because the (int) syntax =
would be specifically for weak types. It=E2=80=99s not really a =
compromise at all, actually.

> 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=E2=80=9D).

Well this RFC tries to strike a different balance: rather than having =
the chaos of some functions using weak types, others strict types, =
others both, it just adds scalar types and lets you choose the behaviour =
that suits you. It means weak typing fans can live in their weakly-typed =
world, and strict typing fans can live in their strictly-typed world. =
That=E2=80=99s the idea, anyway.

But I=E2=80=99m just going in circles at this point. :P

Thanks for your contributions.

--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/