Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84568
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <C0.EE.07702.B6B80055@pb1.pair.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <ff8e8d5564b00b7baead3d9dd46282c8@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ff8e8d5564b00b7baead3d9dd46282c8@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 19:37:25 +0100
Lines: 2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="UTF-8";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Importance: Normal
Subject: Re: [VOTE][RFC] Coercive Scalar Type Hints
From: bensor987@neuf.fr ("Benoit Schildnecht")

Hi,

You are making a very huge mistake, IMHO. By having 2 conflicting RFC,
you are taking the risk they both fail. And it won't do any good to the
language.

While you could have either proposed yours after the STH one if it
would have failed, or create a new RFC to make the STH one evolve
if it would have succeeded, you decided to act with precipitation.
Why did you do this ?

I'm kinda sad, upset and anxious.

Regards,


"Zeev Suraski"  a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion :
>The vote on the Coercive Scalar Type Hints is now open for voting.

>The latest version of the RFC includes changes discussed on internals@ last
week:

>1.  Accept string->bool and int->bool conversions (false->bool is not
supported)

>2.  Accept leading/trailing spaces in string->number conversions.



wiki.php.net/rfc/coercive_sth

wiki.php.net/rfc/coercive_sth#vote



Thanks!



Zeev