Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84863
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.44 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: morrison.levi@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <BLU436-SMTP5196EEC16BA57867D2DB25E2050@phx.gbl>
References: <BLU436-SMTP234CAFED9639237DE430B18E2190@phx.gbl>
	<325E0097-FD7E-4997-A95D-20C62368E162@zend.com>
	<55031C54.6060802@eliw.com>
	<CAMc0WS5MJ_RAtNO47R4wQjy8_YSDzzZeGECLUnzSVOAmB2JyPw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFp73Xtk4-o=DjipY4niopmgg+JC+Yyju_oxUWKWEHqMgQoiOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<7CE491F0-C243-4788-ADA2-5DA9DF1D1168@php.net>
	<d40df0c5636fccd2dd672ad1a4b72ced@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEPJdukMnxn+Rjxy7tN0oSfoD_ryNwKDRLjJF6AAwGoWGH8WQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<332304ae552bfc635f999a8d73b505f0@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU7Yv4T2YJYm9B3jyoro+28opg1XtcrZAT9+ZTmVFkq4Cg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc0WS5+AwBuyqE4BobM_MaR97gWPQQm+Ot2k1Jja+69JBTBHw@mail.gmail.com>
	<85d81405ee1791efadea83cf734ebce3@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAyV7nF81EPPEwcomFsiwr_8KQOnWdwJ5E8_aCoJqUzF5pNAdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BLU436-SMTP5196EEC16BA57867D2DB25E2050@phx.gbl>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:13:19 -0600
Message-ID: <CAFMT4NpubMthM7fnhcG1qLFdaB+tH8OvfFURDUGbNS6sb=fkhQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>
Cc: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com>, 
	Stelian Mocanita <stelianm@php.net>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Basic Scalar Types
From: levim@php.net (Levi Morrison)

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Am 15.03.2015 um 18:48 schrieb Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Andrea's RFC had the following wording:
>>
>>> The only exception to this is the handling of NULL: in order to be cons=
istent with our existing type hints for classes, callables and arrays, NULL=
 is not accepted by default, unless the parameter is explicitly given a def=
ault value of NULL. This would work well with the draft Declaring Nullable =
Types RFC.
>>
>> This proposal has a different behavior here. It explicitly allows
>> nulls for types:
>>
>> function foo(int $abc) { var_dump($abc); }
>>
>> Unlike my proposal and any of Andrea's, calling foo(null) will be
>> int(0) instead of an error.
>>
>> This is an important distinction as it basically undermines any
>> attempt at a nullable RFC, since it makes primitives implicitly
>> nullable.
>>
>> Anthony.
>
> Anthony,
>
> I think you've got something wrong there. It won't undermine an attempt a=
t a nullable RFC.
>
> In the weak scalar typing world, nullables won't change what we accept, b=
ut what we receive.
>
> function (int|null $abc) { var_dump($abc); }
> (or ?int or whatever syntax we will use)
>
> would allow null to *not* be casted here.
> Means foo(null) will lead to $abc being null and not int(0) with that sig=
nature.

I think allowing `null` for an `int` is an error. Converting a null to
zero on a type boundary is harmful in my opinion.