Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83126
Return-Path: <leight@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 56769 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2015 21:57:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 18 Feb 2015 21:57:59 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=leight@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=leight@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.160.174 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: leight@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.160.174 mail-yk0-f174.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.160.174] ([209.85.160.174:62862] helo=mail-yk0-f174.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id CC/7C-25021-6EA05E45 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:57:58 -0500
Received: by mail-yk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 9so2379637ykp.5
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:57:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        bh=GDwxGXGyh+xk47+yqAyQ2gIyNkBtU9K5rOc9Tk5JUR0=;
        b=M+mc+STLalFMVeHP4B2mVYAeFK7sAI3Ee2BCbJCuRhtgs6iNPycsZcAbE7QIFBsm8z
         AUpd7eohH4hihXpXtLbxMkU0SmlSSKdt0/4PfyxWqaxWr4QkP/XX2NHzZbBA7ZRP+BfW
         wGxEeT9RQ1V1f8GvQe3v36ofP9ER79NENTruM81QZqKU9lwGvHOgBFyQMK3VA+y1dnVX
         qAUUocQfwssmMapcdr1wB+R9/UFUXfcWnBbADz7a29A1pBWGXKmoMmAsosdXgPi9eQD4
         wMISejUoEVy6wlOkzOaDW/yWOoytD5LC4Mp82n0v95HUVWhfTlqysVhh+K0/Q3YhQ7P9
         /O9g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.220.100.6 with SMTP id w6mr886118vcn.65.1424296675616; Wed,
 18 Feb 2015 13:57:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.179.168 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:57:55 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAAyV7nFWFjzSUEGpsUmmxhp3S7cxRB1R8thi6B2hX2MCZkrguQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nGjdguX=4Nt0H=kYnwg8rZ1BkWf8duGZfzheOXXV61pqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPwsocF55ZgYXr+QdP-vny4qVApoNm7aE6=NCJME=uSUBzZLqw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nFWFjzSUEGpsUmmxhp3S7cxRB1R8thi6B2hX2MCZkrguQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:57:55 +0000
Message-ID: <CAPwsocG8FZ5wa2SvqFn6fJy0a4bDnBTtFbGQTCOtcydv4nAemw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC-Discuss] Scalar Type Declarations v0.5
From: leight@gmail.com (Leigh)

On 18 February 2015 at 21:50, Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Static Analysis Is Possible With Weak Declarations
>>
>> The advocacy of allowing `accepts_float(returns_int());` doesn't help
>> the cause of static analysers in strict mode.
>
> Java does exactly this and is statically analyzable. So...?

As discussed elsewhere. You're absolutely right, it is up to the
analyser to throw a warning on this because it is a type-based
conversion rather than value based one.