Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82217
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 74.125.82.172 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <54D7F972.4010107@seld.be>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 05:48:46 +0200
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <2013B2A4-74E6-4452-8A48-E749DCBEA2EF@zend.com>
References: <8703B53E-2C4A-4AC6-95C4-D4F19C6D5221@ajf.me> <CAF+90c-s=s5P-w-P48iqm9J+RJn1DvKTnDCsn2sYDxHmmg=7NA@mail.gmail.com> <54D5659D.5000602@php.net> <54D7A6DB.3050209@seld.be> <c35d12eadc1abc5df89b3d8a324e0260@mail.gmail.com> <74136F1E-817F-4A33-8228-B47045DD65C3@ajf.me> <54D7EB44.9010005@gmail.com> <D82F028B-B730-45A9-BFA6-1E63D9E1B332@ajf.me> <b447c382a180aef16bccedcc734c41e0@mail.gmail.com> <54D7F972.4010107@seld.be>
To: Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Scalar Type Hints
From: zeev@zend.com (Zeev Suraski)


> On 9 =D7=91=D7=A4=D7=91=D7=A8=D7=B3 2015, at 02:04, Jordi Boggiano <j.bogg=
iano@seld.be> wrote:
>=20
>> On 08/02/2015 23:24, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>> There's zero or virtually zero controversy surrounding the weak typing RFC=
,
>> the one that was v0.1.  The controversy wasn't (and isn't) about what was=
 in
>> v0.1, but rather, about what wasn't in there, namely, strict typing;  Not=
 in
>> the contents of the v0.1 RFC itself, which, again, had zero controversy
>> around and is effectively being voted on as an integral part of the curre=
nt
>> RFC.  You have virtually all of the supporters of strict typing voting in=

>> favor of the current RFC, also voting in favor of the v0.1 elements which=

>> are an integral part of it.
>=20
> By this logic, the current proposal also does not take anything away from w=
eak-typing proponents (which I guess I am a part of FWIW). It lets everyone b=
e happy in their corner.
>=20
> I don't see how this is worse than one side winning by ignoring the other.=


It's simple.  We have two proposals here, A and B.

A - has pretty much everybody agreeing with is a good idea.  Nobody objects t=
o it.  It's under consensus.
B - has a large number of people thinking it's alien to PHP, and has many pe=
ople objecting to it.

The vote is on A+B.

Zeev