Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82966
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain devilix.net designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPwsocGARdhqb+ViDMNk7c+KOrwqaapNY0Vswipr0toUAoo86A@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>
	<CAPwsocGARdhqb+ViDMNk7c+KOrwqaapNY0Vswipr0toUAoo86A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:53:08 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPhkiZyfQEDt=PbxLmW3GigNYp-mM0JL-fE1MMXGbuVkvzrx=A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leigh <leight@gmail.com>
Cc: Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net>, 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: narf@devilix.net (Andrey Andreev)

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Leigh <leight@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
>

^ That. I've said the same thing multiple times already.

Cheers,
Andrey.