Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81990
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 209.85.192.51 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D303B26E-AC30-4FFB-AAF1-080363243EDD@ajf.me>
References: <8703B53E-2C4A-4AC6-95C4-D4F19C6D5221@ajf.me>
	<D5E65B07-2366-4A14-97BF-780267200717@zend.com>
	<DFBE8CD2-F740-4399-A44E-7AC0625ECEA2@ajf.me>
	<CAN383GD6K8YBnvZDyq4STgCAyQA_PUdJeFdXhgw_v7XezALkFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<D303B26E-AC30-4FFB-AAF1-080363243EDD@ajf.me>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 16:24:03 -0800
Message-ID: <CAN383GDSqwAkRd-m-3Yo_Vac-TjUXF5xo0tqTXaSKpiX3xLhug@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133b5721b73a5050e607054
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Scalar Type Hints
From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans)

--001a1133b5721b73a5050e607054
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:

> Hi Andi,
>
> > On 5 Feb 2015, at 23:57, Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> wrote:
> >
> > The folks who really want all this great strict typing should head over
> to Oracle.com and download free open-source Java? I hear it's got a lot o=
f
> strict typing features in it. Only downside is that it'll take them 10x
> longer to complete their projects. OK sorry. Had to say that :) I realize
> it's not the same=E2=80=A6
>
> I don=E2=80=99t think it=E2=80=99s terribly funny to tell a large portion=
 of the PHP
> community to go away.
>

Oh come on... You're taking me a bit too literally. Your proposal isn't
Java-like strict typing... I even said that.


> > Andrea, while I don't agree with what you say I accept it. *But* exactl=
y
> for the reasons you state (the big divide) we should also have a weak typ=
e
> hinting option to vote for in parallel. If you feel morally unable to do
> that then I can copy your work and just have another RFC running in
> parallel but I think that would do a disservice to the good work you've
> done.
>
> No, I don=E2=80=99t think that=E2=80=99s fair. I=E2=80=99d be against hol=
ding a vote on strict
> types only for the same reason: the community is divided. Letting one sid=
e
> =E2=80=9Cwin" is simply unfair on everyone else.
>

I don't understand that statement. You mean it's not OK for any side to win
unless you win? Or are you saying that you tried to strike a balance
between the two parties which you hoped everyone could rally around? What
if they can't? It's all or nothing? Btw, not trying to be facetious but
really trying to understand where you're coming from.


> To quote myself in the Scalar Type Hints thread, here=E2=80=99s a rough t=
ally of
> who was in favour of what in the v0.1 thread (I think =E2=80=9Cyourself=
=E2=80=9D was Zeev
> in that context):
>

Zeev and I aren't twins (thank god for him) and aren't always in agreement
on such topics. Looks like I am not on that list. Don't see him either
btw...

Anyway, I think I need to sleep on it... I understand what you're trying to
do. It's definitely not a crazy strict type hinting approach (which would
be very bad)... But I find elements of it challenging...

Andi


> > On 15 Jan 2015, at 14:51, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
> >
> > Let=E2=80=99s have a look. From a quick skim over the thread for v0.1:
> >
> > * In favour of weak types (or the RFC anyway): Adam, Stas, yourself,
> Jordi, Pierre,
> > * Against, in favour of strict types: Maxime, Nikita, Markus, Marco,
> Leigh, Levi, Sven(?)
> > * In favour of strict types, not against weak types as compromise:
> Matthew
> > * Somewhat in favour: Sebastian
> > * In favour of allowing both approaches: Marcio, Thomas, Marco
> >
> > I apologise if I am misrepresenting anyone=E2=80=99s position.
> >
> > This is unlikely to be super-representative of the PHP community.
> However, I=E2=80=99m not sure I=E2=80=99d say =E2=80=9Coverwhelmingly pos=
itive=E2=80=9D. It can be easy to
> get confirmation bias when reading RFC threads.
> >
> > It is very clear to me that a lot of people would like strict types, an=
d
> some people would like weak types. As to their relative numbers, I cannot
> say.
> >
> > I don=E2=80=99t think it=E2=80=99s really fair to cover only the use ca=
se of one half of
> the PHP community. The other half counts too. This is a rather divisive
> issue.
>
> As is rather clear, there was no such consensus on internals. Confirmatio=
n
> bias can be a powerful thing, and it=E2=80=99s easy to forget that the nu=
mber of
> messages doesn=E2=80=99t reflect the number of participants.
>
> The views on other places were, from my experience, even more against wea=
k
> types than internals. Internals seems to be the most pro-weak types PHP
> community I=E2=80=99m a part of.
>
> Because of this schism, I really think it would be completely unfair to
> force through weak types. I know internals might like it (or some of
> internals, anyway), and I know you and Zeev certainly do, but it=E2=80=99=
s not as
> clear-cut in the wider community.
>
> This isn=E2=80=99t some minor issue, either: it=E2=80=99s a very frequent=
ly resurfacing
> topic, and one which is particularly divisive. It=E2=80=99s not some mino=
r syntax
> issue that merely holding a vote will solve.
>
> --
> Andrea Faulds
> http://ajf.me/
>
>
>
>
>

--001a1133b5721b73a5050e607054--