Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82184
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.199 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: <CAH-PCH5MbjvC5aqBNZ9b=tmvXCvNUv9drCv1B3vFiErSP2A6=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2015 22:44:34 +0000
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <9B296579-52CA-4C7D-8D35-916D8DCA08A7@ajf.me>
References: <8703B53E-2C4A-4AC6-95C4-D4F19C6D5221@ajf.me> <CAH-PCH5MbjvC5aqBNZ9b=tmvXCvNUv9drCv1B3vFiErSP2A6=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Scalar Type Hints
From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds)

Hi Ferenc,

> On 8 Feb 2015, at 22:18, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> I've voted no for two reasons:
> 1, I don't really like the the proposed declare solution, I know that =
you put much thought and effort with finding a way to make the strict =
hints opt-in for the caller, but I think it is still not a good =
compromise: people in favor of strict hints will hate it because it is =
opt-in from the caller, so they can't use scalar hints to save the =
boilerplate for argument validation

Hmm. Personally, I don=E2=80=99t think types are really a substitute for =
argument validation. This doesn=E2=80=99t provide a means to force =
strict types upon people who don=E2=80=99t want them, sure=E2=80=A6 but =
the proposal is designed precisely to prevent that, since I don=E2=80=99t =
see someone like Zeev (say) wanting to deal with strict types any time =
soon.=20

> , and other people like me will unlike it because they think that the =
blockless declare will cause many errors and debugging headache when =
somebody moves some code between files (or concatenating files as part =
of their deployment process).

It=E2=80=99s worth noting that I intend to change this to have the =
=E2=80=9C<?php strict=E2=80=9D syntax rather than declare(). That=E2=80=99=
ll have to be a subsequent RFC, as I don=E2=80=99t want to cancel the =
vote. But it looks like it will pass since all the feedback I=E2=80=99ve =
got about that so far has been positive.

> 2, As this is a really polarizing topic I would like if the eventual =
solution would have wider support from the current php-src regular =
contributors, and not just pushed through by "force". (And I know that =
status quo sucks when somebody trying to do innovative stuff, but it is =
a safe thing to default to).

I=E2=80=99m not sure. There are some people completely opposed to =
compromise, that can=E2=80=99t be helped. For everyone else, I=E2=80=99m =
not sure how I feel about contentious votes. If it gets through by a 2/3 =
majority then presumably it does have significant support, though I =
worry about lasting impact.

Votes do, at least, provide a way to resolve contentious issues, though.

> Thanks for your efforts on such a hard topic and I hope you can =
eventually succeed where everyone else failed thus far!

Thanks.

--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/