Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82145 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 90795 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2015 15:49:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 8 Feb 2015 15:49:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ajf@ajf.me; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ajf@ajf.me; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.199 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.64.116.199 imap11-2.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [192.64.116.199] ([192.64.116.199:55849] helo=imap11-2.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 2D/81-15550-B6587D45 for ; Sun, 08 Feb 2015 10:48:59 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 950B68800D5; Sun, 8 Feb 2015 10:48:56 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at imap11.ox.privateemail.com Received: from mail.privateemail.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap11.ox.privateemail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Nvo4u8rXWBoO; Sun, 8 Feb 2015 10:48:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from oa-res-26-240.wireless.abdn.ac.uk (oa-res-26-240.wireless.abdn.ac.uk [137.50.26.240]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B847C8800A2; Sun, 8 Feb 2015 10:48:55 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Priority: 3 In-Reply-To: <482375682.216572.1423402329172.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxbaltgw04.schlund.de> Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2015 15:48:52 +0000 Cc: Internals Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <162384795.216427.1423397046700.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxbaltgw01.schlund.de> <6C71C0BA-2B52-48D3-9AC9-41EEDD824EC5@ajf.me> <482375682.216572.1423402329172.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxbaltgw04.schlund.de> To: Timm Friebe X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Reserving primitive types From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) Hi, > On 8 Feb 2015, at 13:32, Timm Friebe wrote: >=20 >>> I personally see the benefits this could have but also the BC break = this >>> would >>> introduce. > [...] >> I don't see the point of this: the Scalar Type Hints RFC already has = a voting >> option on reserving the type names, and it is set to pass, so by the = time your >> RFC could go to a vote, it would have been rendered redundant. >=20 > My point is to prevent adoption hurdles *before* PHP 7's release. PHP = 5 was a > sad story in regard to this. PHP 7 shouldn't be; and doesn't have to: = So far, > PHP 7 has stayed largely BC-break free, which is good for its = adoption. If this RFC would somehow pass, yes. However, you=E2=80=99re introducing = a competing proposal at the =E2=80=9Celeventh hour=E2=80=9D, so to = speak, which is terribly nice. Unless there=E2=80=99s a radical shift in = how people vote on the Scalar Type Hints RFC, it won=E2=80=99t pass, = anyway. > I believe more than just yes and no should be considered in this case, = which > breaks existing code - not just in edge cases and in = near-bug-scenarios.=20 This has been discussed extensively in the Scalar Type Hints RFC thread, = but people have voted to reserve the type names anyway. I appreciate your concerns, but introducing a competing RFC *while its = competitor is in voting* is both poor sportsmanship, and quite probably = futile. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/