Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82944
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.177 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAESVnVoFD7-A2_a1ZPR9av2tiVbbs7D0NUt0TihH-dQFvhkH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <011801d04a07$83ab1c00$8b015400$@php.net>
	<CABDNdAFQsbo-A-gijPCwYDOf3ts-yKpP0tAL--WUaLU26GB-AQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<016f01d04a3a$e9183220$bb489660$@php.net>
	<CAESVnVoM7YbmXA8hTG1O66j+6YX3Xx2Q3uj_F=TPjHA4ws=8JA@mail.gmail.com>
	<54E290E5.3020508@lerdorf.com>
	<CAESVnVpXmmfDh6iqT=n27iHQ21_QxPWkez_=bEc1Dpn+MNrjMg@mail.gmail.com>
	<54E2AD88.6040206@lerdorf.com>
	<CAESVnVoFD7-A2_a1ZPR9av2tiVbbs7D0NUt0TihH-dQFvhkH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 11:30:24 +0000
Message-ID: <CAPwsocGARdhqb+ViDMNk7c+KOrwqaapNY0Vswipr0toUAoo86A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>
Cc: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>, francois@php.net, 
	Philip Sturgeon <pjsturgeon@gmail.com>, Arvids Godjuks <arvids.godjuks@gmail.com>, 
	Jefferson Gonzalez <jgmdev@gmail.com>, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints
From: leight@gmail.com (Leigh)

On 17 February 2015 at 05:48, Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net> wrote:
>>> We can sigh and tut about this not being "the PHP way", but the script
>>> author was the one who chose to enter into a tight contract, and the
>>> script author, not you, is the one who should have that authority over
>>> their own application.
>>
>> I find this view way too extreme.
>>
> You find giving authority over an application to the application
> author too extreme?

And you find taking authority over a library away from the library
author completely acceptable?

If I write an API that works perfectly well in strict mode, why
shouldn't I be able to turn strict on for my whole library? Do I just
tell users that non-strict mode constitutes undefined behavior for
this library, and refuse to fix any bugs that come up because of it?

I'm sure I could find a way of detecting non-strict mode and throw a
fatal, or force access through a facade/wrapper of some sort where
I've turned on strict and made myself the caller. Isn't this equally
unhelpful? The point is some people will want strict turned on, and
they will find ways to force it on people. You're going to have to
live with it, so just make it a possibility from the outset.