Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81981
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 209.85.216.179 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20150205234432.933F5261BE9@dd15934.kasserver.com>
References: <8703B53E-2C4A-4AC6-95C4-D4F19C6D5221@ajf.me>
	<D5E65B07-2366-4A14-97BF-780267200717@zend.com>
	<20150205234432.933F5261BE9@dd15934.kasserver.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 15:50:48 -0800
Message-ID: <CAN383GDAKUJWda=XJwWUL3VHsfc6cc0stJx8HEDp1z2fXs3jBg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thomas Bley <mails@thomasbley.de>
Cc: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113abbdc2629ba050e5ff9df
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Scalar Type Hints
From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans)

--001a113abbdc2629ba050e5ff9df
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am not sure.

I think we need to explicitly vote on a weak type hinting option.
Andrea, I think this should be an option in any vote. Right now it feels
like the only option to people is the very challenging, non-consensus
driving RFC or nothing.
I think we have plenty of key folks who would support weak type hinting and
frankly, I think that would be a huge win for everyone!

If I need to put forward a separate weak type hinting RFC which would
heavily plagiarize Andrea's good work then please let me know.

Andi


On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Thomas Bley <mails@thomasbley.de> wrote:

> I think the consensus is not so far away.
> As far as I understand the rules, it is possible to vote yes and put up a
> new RFC to remove strict-declare after the voting ends?
>
> Regards
> Thomas
>
> Andi Gutmans wrote on 06.02.2015 00:22:
>
> > I have to say I=E2=80=99m pretty disappointed at the opening of the vot=
e.
> > We had a pretty good RFC (thank you) for weak type hinting which was
> aligned
> > with the spirit of PHP and everyone was able to rally around it.
> > This has now been morphed into something very hard to swallow and IMO
> having
> > such a declare(=E2=80=A6) syntax will be ridiculed by the broader app d=
ev
> community
> > until the end of time=E2=80=A6 But even that syntax aside (it=E2=80=99s=
 only syntax after
> > all), I think we lost the ability to reach consensus on something so
> important
> > to everyone which we haven=E2=80=99t been able to come to agreement on =
for over
> 10
> > years. Finally it was there, in reach and you made a 180 degree turn.
> >
> > I think it=E2=80=99d be so much easier for us to implement weak type hi=
nting.
> Have
> > everyone rally around it. Be happy and then learn and see whether an
> additional
> > mechanism is really necessary. We could even add an E_STRICT_TYPES
> > error_reporting flag to help folks =E2=80=9Cdebug=E2=80=9D their code i=
f they so wish to
> > see if there are any hotspots in their code they may want to take a loo=
k
> at -
> > again not necessarily an error but maybe a debugging tool.
> >
> > But net, net - why not just implement the thing everyone can agree on.
> Have
> > something really good in the spirit of the PHP Language for PHP 7 and
> learn how
> > people leverage that=E2=80=A6 The reality is that for the majority of t=
he Web
> > community =E2=80=9C1=E2=80=9D coming in from HTTP should be accepted as=
 a 1. Period.
> >
> > I voted =E2=80=9Cno=E2=80=9D but I will vote =E2=80=9Cyes=E2=80=9D for =
the competing RFC which is 80%
> > of your RFC. Why are we not given that option??????
> >
> > Andi
> >
> >
> >> On Feb 5, 2015, at 12:14 PM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
> >>
> >> Good evening,
> >>
> >> At long last, I=E2=80=99m going to put the RFC to a vote. It=E2=80=99s=
 been long enough
> -
> >> I don=E2=80=99t think there needs to be, or will be, much further disc=
ussion.
> >>
> >> I=E2=80=99d like to make sure that everyone voting understands the RFC=
 fully.
> Please
> >> read the RFC in full: the details are important. And if  anyone has an=
y
> >> questions or uncertainties, please ask them before voting. I am very
> happy to
> >> answer them.
> >>
> >> I would urge everyone who wants type hints to vote for this RFC. It is
> not a
> >> perfect solution, but there can be no perfect solution to this issue.
> However,
> >> I think it is better than most of the alternatives suggested thus far =
-
> see
> >> the rationale section, and previous discussions. Crucially, this RFC
> would
> >> keep PHP a weakly-typed language, and not force either strict typing,
> nor weak
> >> typing, on anyone who does not want it. It would allow the addition of
> type
> >> hints to existing codebases. It would not create a situation where
> userland
> >> functions are strict yet internal functions are not, because the stric=
t
> mode
> >> affects both. I=E2=80=99ve tested the implementation myself on my own =
code, and
> it
> >> worked well, providing benefits other proposals would not have given
> (see my
> >> previous post about my experiences).
> >>
> >> Voting starts today (2015-02-05) and ends in two weeks=E2=80=99 time
> (2015-02-19).
> >> In addition to the vote on the main RFC, there is also a vote on the
> type
> >> aliases issue, and a vote to reserve the type names for future RFCs=E2=
=80=99
> sake if
> >> this RFC fails.
> >>
> >> The RFC can be found here, and it contains a voting widget:
> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/scalar_type_hints
> >>
> >> Thank you for your time.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andrea Faulds
> >> http://ajf.me/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> >
>
>

--001a113abbdc2629ba050e5ff9df--