Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82255 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 1283 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2015 10:16:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Feb 2015 10:16:42 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=php@beccati.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=php@beccati.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain beccati.com designates 176.9.114.167 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: php@beccati.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 176.9.114.167 spritz.beccati.com Received: from [176.9.114.167] ([176.9.114.167:58474] helo=mail.beccati.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id BF/F9-50460-80988D45 for ; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 05:16:41 -0500 Received: (qmail 2667 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2015 10:16:37 -0000 Received: from home.beccati.com (HELO ?192.168.1.202?) (88.149.176.119) by mail.beccati.com with SMTP; 9 Feb 2015 10:16:37 -0000 Message-ID: <54D888FA.9010607@beccati.com> Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 11:16:26 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tony Marston , internals@lists.php.net References: <54D606D2.7030102@lsces.co.uk> <54D73248.9030509@lsces.co.uk> <14.24.24707.48937D45@pb1.pair.com> <54D74C68.6070402@beccati.com> <25.F8.50460.1C288D45@pb1.pair.com> <54D883D2.5020009@beccati.com> <28.A9.50460.0F688D45@pb1.pair.com> In-Reply-To: <28.A9.50460.0F688D45@pb1.pair.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Dragging the legacy users forward. From: php@beccati.com (Matteo Beccati) On 09/02/2015 11:07, Tony Marston wrote: > There may not be an actual RFC for any of these *YET*, but the > revolutionaries are still out there, plotting and scheming in their dark > corners. They will be the ones who leap on an innocent-sounding feature > and silently convert it to something more insidious. Just look at how > "type hinting" has been turned into "type enforcement" as an example. Only if you're willing to use it. But with the current proposal, no 3rd party library developer can actually force you to use strict typing if you don't want to. What's insidious about it? That's the reason I voted "yes", even though I dislike the idea of strict scalar type hinting in PHP. Cheers -- Matteo Beccati Development & Consulting - http://www.beccati.com/