Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82301
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.223.176 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPhkiZyYP2CEiR8FqG8nCm8JGcoH5EfgcNm+PXx2SAst=eQMCA@mail.gmail.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> <2013B2A4-74E6-4452-8A48-E749DCBEA2EF@zend.com>
 <6C020C7F-85C0-4C88-8766-48CEDA6290F8@ajf.me> <3399a072b6cb66434e72c5f5b37d5df0@mail.gmail.com>
 <54D8ECCF.4000202@seld.be> <CAPhkiZyYP2CEiR8FqG8nCm8JGcoH5EfgcNm+PXx2SAst=eQMCA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:12:44 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFp73XuGq5JhC60buMWUJUMC9NTogZ9_a6j+G+vBb0F3+DshbQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrey Andreev <narf@devilix.net>
Cc: Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be>, "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01184d5cb69622050eabb889
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Scalar Type Hints
From: guilhermeblanco@gmail.com ("guilhermeblanco@gmail.com")

--089e01184d5cb69622050eabb889
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi,

I read again and again the RFC and I just decided to switch my vote.
Originally a "YES" voter, I'm now a "NO" voter. I still want strict types
to exist in PHP, and not only at the end-user level, but also at the
internals level (I can see so many optimizations around...).
However, I think it's not an INI setting or a per file operation. I
consider it should be (at the current PHP's pace) a heavily flexible
support. I tend to agree that if you put "string" in its definition, you
don't want a weak type, but strict type, the same way when you put MyClass
instead of nothing.

That's why I don't agree with the declare or "use strict" or <?php strict.
If I say "string $foo", I want a string, not a converted value. By
accepting this fact, makes easier in the future to make OO primitive types
if we wish, and also makes everything easier for everyone... if you have
foo(string $name), you expect strict type... if you want weak type,
foo($name). All code will work as is today, no BC breaks.

That's my 2 cents... now time to update my vote in RFC.

[]s,


On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Andrey Andreev <narf@devilix.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be> wrote:
> >
> > And that is exactly why this RFC is great, since it lets the
> > strict-proponents have their strict types in their files, but those
> > preferring weak ones can remain in the default weak mode, never see an
> ugly
> > declare(), and still call strict code in weak mode.
> >
> > That is why I don't quite understand the "no" votes coming from
> weak-hints
> > proponents. Unless of course you would prefer to pass weak-only v0.1 and
> > then shoot down any attempt at strict hints. That strikes me as quite
> > selfish though, given the strict-proponents isn't such a tiny group of
> > people.
> >
> > And then there are the people sitting somewhere in between the black and
> > white camps. Those that would like to use strict sometimes for some
> critical
> > code paths, and for them the proposed solution is quite good as well.
> >
>
> I am in the "between black and white" camp and this RFC doesn't give
> me what I want, nor did the 0.1 version of it.
> I would vote 'no' on both if I had voting privileges.
>
> Please, all, stop speculating and just let the votes count.
>
> Cheers,
> Andrey.
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>


-- 
Guilherme Blanco
MSN: guilhermeblanco@hotmail.com
GTalk: guilhermeblanco
Toronto - ON/Canada

--089e01184d5cb69622050eabb889--