Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83007
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 212.27.42.2 as permitted sender)
Reply-To: <francois@php.net>
To: "'Lester Caine'" <lester@lsces.co.uk>,
	<internals@lists.php.net>
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>	<d8031ce52e9965c789887e8f7b687a4e@mail.gmail.com>	<CAESVnVpA+M6iv_zbDmKTEF8Q1zKjwnbi1ucc=UyuUyRr+X+U3w@mail.gmail.com>	<022801d04ab1$4a0c47d0$de24d770$@php.net>	<1913e09d7f52541901d8574d2080a63f@mail.gmail.com> <CAPhkiZy+3qzFSN4Kfx42jrZVukE2zLeGzB3Yez5=o9FhGnxiRg@mail.gmail.com> <54E35855.4060906@lsces.co.uk> <025a01d04ac6$b3cd7170$1b685450$@php.net> <54E364AE.8090907@lsces.co.uk> <027401d04ae0$28b64cf0$7a22e6d0$@php.net> <54E399F6.9080609@lsces.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <54E399F6.9080609@lsces.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:28:13 +0100
Message-ID: <02a001d04af8$a2ec62d0$e8c52870$@php.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQGD0sLDaA+/0NIeBlQhQC5OtPA/xwHih9+6AanvcsEBj7eMCwEU0CpMAs0H7+gBDwGZjwJNu28fAWzN038BTcdE4wK3JE5jAZIhIykCDBQfTgJuBwbVnM9/GFA=
Content-Language: fr
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Reviving scalar type hints
From: francois@php.net (=?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Laupretre?=)

> De : Lester Caine [mailto:lester@lsces.co.uk]
>
> On 17/02/15 18:33, Fran=C3=A7ois Laupretre wrote:
> > What does this mean in your case ? Just that, as long as the feature =
is not
> available, your function won't have an explicit return type. Period. =
And,
> please, don't change false to 0 ;).
>=20
> I simply can't see the case for limited function type hints at all! I

If you can't see it after so much was written on the subject, what can =
we do ? Do you imply that, if *you* cannot understand the need, it does =
not exist ?

> either already have clean defined data from the database, or I need to
> validate the data from users before using it.

If that's your only data source, that's OK. I confirm you probably don't =
need type hinting. You probably even don't need functions, classes and =
the rest. A 50-line script should fit.

>  While validating I need to
> confirm constraints of data type so adding some extra wrapper that =
only
> does half the job just seems a pointless exercise.

The point of type hinting is not validating user input.

> Annotating the
> correct data type would be of more use and I already have that in the
> docblock and my IDE produces those hints while I am writing the code -
> which it has done for many years.

That's different. There is overlapping there but the purpose is not the =
same. IDEs only can do a limited set of static analysis. As soon as you =
have indirect calls, IDE-based static analysis is down, let alone =
comment-stripped libraries and others. If you want more constraints on =
input and output, look at DbC (design by contract), as it can handle =
tests too slow to run in production.

 To my mind it IS in the IDE that much
> of this stuff which people keep saying is not 'runtime' should be
> managed, and anything that is not needed at 'runtime' should be
> removable but what is being added across several areas all seem to
> beadding the same things - partially - using different methods - =
without
> any obvious gain. Additionally I'm now passing data as an array as =
that
> was the 'best practice' a few years back so it is rare to be passing a
> single value anyway.

IDEs are worthwile but not mandatory and runtime features have nothing =
to do with IDEs.

Now, you were (aggressively) complaining about returning int or false. =
You were sure you had found the case that would prove all of this was =
ready for the bin. I took the time to explain. Then, you're complaining =
it's no use because you don't understand its purpose and because you =
chose to bundle your arguments in arrays...

Unfortunately, I'm afraid I can't do more for you but what I generally =
hate : 'If we don't like it, don't use it'.

I try to be kind with constructive posts but, here, I have better to do.

Fran=C3=A7ois