Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82261
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.200 as permitted sender)
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> <2013B2A4-74E6-4452-8A48-E749DCBEA2EF@zend.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <2013B2A4-74E6-4452-8A48-E749DCBEA2EF@zend.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <6C020C7F-85C0-4C88-8766-48CEDA6290F8@ajf.me>
Cc: Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be>,
 "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 10:44:28 +0000
To: Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Scalar Type Hints
From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds)

Hi,

> On 9 Feb 2015, at 03:48, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote:
>=20
> A - has pretty much everybody agreeing with is a good idea.  Nobody object=
s to it.  It's under consensus.

This isn't true. I've explained why it isn't true several times. Maybe you a=
re suffering from confirmation bias or something, but there is no such "cons=
ensus". Quite a few internals contributors liked v0.1. Quite a few didn't. I=
've gone and evidenced this before in replies sent directly to you.=20

In addition, the reaction from the wider community was largely negative.

> B - has a large number of people thinking it's alien to PHP, and has many p=
eople objecting to it.

B also has a large number of supporters because it is a pragmatic compromise=
.

A also had a large number of detractors.

> The vote is on A+B.

No it isn't.

You are claiming, as I understand it, that:


* Weak typing has consensus (it doesn't)
* Strict typing is entirely controversial (it has many supporters, however)
* This proposal including both somehow nullifies the argument that weak typi=
ng lacks consensus (it doesn't - someone is free to oppose the addition of s=
omething in isolation yet support its addition in combination)

The truth of the matter is this. There are at least two approaches to scalar=
 type hint behaviour: weak and strict. Both are highly controversial. The ad=
dition of either exclusively, is controversial. The addition of both togethe=
r, is controversial. The addition of "stricter" weak typing, is controversia=
l. The issue of scalar type hints is highly controversial in general for the=
se reasons.

There is no consensus whatsoever. To suggest there is would be to grossly ex=
aggerate.

--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/=