Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83092 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 83892 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2015 16:51:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Feb 2015 16:51:50 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=francois@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=francois@php.net; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 212.27.42.2 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: francois@php.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.27.42.2 smtp2-g21.free.fr Received: from [212.27.42.2] ([212.27.42.2:13127] helo=smtp2-g21.free.fr) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 3A/25-56339-523C4E45 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:51:50 -0500 Received: from moorea (unknown [82.240.16.115]) by smtp2-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03DA4B0277; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:51:26 +0100 (CET) Reply-To: To: =?utf-8?Q?'P=C3=A1draic_Brady'?= Cc: "'Robert Stoll'" , "'Zeev Suraski'" , "'Nikita Popov'" , "'Rasmus Lerdorf'" , "'Sara Golemon'" , "'PHP internals'" References: <54E3E27B.2010903@lerdorf.com> <2f99c47df51fa6c73131032ec50fade0@mail.gmail.com> <005201d04b6c$1122d130$33687390$@tutteli.ch> <030f01d04b7f$0c71d1a0$255574e0$@php.net> In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:51:43 +0100 Message-ID: <034e01d04b9b$2d7c0160$88740420$@php.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQKz6wpj8b81mnwJq1LfxWbU4ZJyQgGjcksIAbrU1N8Bn0wufQGLyLi6ApOAQNgCST1AMAF0MY31msiLc1A= Content-Language: fr X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 150218-0, 18/02/2015), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Scalar Type Hints v0.4 From: francois@php.net (=?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Laupretre?=) > De : P=C3=A1draic Brady [mailto:padraic.brady@gmail.com] > > Careful, it helps not to call folk "radicals" if you intend to pursue > a compromise with them ;). Sorry, english is not my native language, and 'radical' may be = offensive. I was just looking for a word for people who consider providing two = modes is a pre-requisite to any discussion. > I wouldn't necessarily mind int->float - it's lossless assuming one = way only. It's lossless but it kills the 'strict' position. It can be claimed, one = hand on the heart, this will be the only exception but, as use cases and = side effects accumulate, we all know it will finish as a bunch of = exceptions to a no-more strict mode, adding confusion where it is not = needed. I guess the next one would be (int -> bool), and the rest would = follow. I am taking the problem the other way round, determining from scratch = the filtering/conversions I want to enable and disable. The result will = probably be the same, but not with the same wasted energy and not in the = same time. Regards Fran=C3=A7ois