Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85031
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.44 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: "Yasuo Ohgaki" <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>
Cc: "PHP internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CABBJUpfiy1BpdyZ5MJmQb3vQz9U8TkSECHCRctupV+BUG1H=fw@mail.gmail.com> <CAEZPtU7qa9N+4HYdtjseN4K83e0Oy8rZDi8FbXfJ9Zp0ks6rRg@mail.gmail.com> <CABBJUpe_fUiwuJw5Q-u+ntVOyVU-xN+C2EFL79TmJJu7Gmh38w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.11.1503161113020.4205@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl> <CAGa2bXZm_ph9=TV_7oLB7NWSkX1iCpXqBiYVROQiKCFujrHJCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 14:44:49 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
Message-ID: <op.xvk9kzcdc9evq2@nikita-pc>
In-Reply-To: <CAGa2bXZm_ph9=TV_7oLB7NWSkX1iCpXqBiYVROQiKCFujrHJCQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] About declare(strict_types = 1)
From: inefedor@gmail.com ("Nikita Nefedov")

On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 14:33:00 +0300, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>  =

wrote:

> Hi Derick,
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> wrote=
:
>
>> To be frank, I don't think "I don't like this" is a terribly good rea=
son
>> to vote against (or for something). What is important is how many peo=
ple
>> would actually benefit from a feature, without it causing issues for
>> others. I am certainly no fan of the "declare" *syntax*, but I do kno=
w,
>> from talking at conferences that many many developers would like to s=
ee
>> scalar type hints in some way =E2=80=94 both weak (mode 1 of the STHv=
5 RFC), and
>> strict (mode 2). It even caters for people that don't want to use the=
m
>> at all, as they can simply not use them. I also know, that without a
>> dual mode, it seems very unlikely for scalar type hints to make it
>> into PHP 7, and I don't think that is what users want. As this is our=

>> *best* bet, I can only vote "yes".
>
>
> Are you sure on your bet?
>
> lib.php:
> <?php
>         declare(strict_types =3D 1);
>         function foo(int $a) {
>         // no function call here
>         }
> ?>
> The declare here does just nothing.
>
> a.php:
> <?php
>         require "lib.php";
>         foo("123"); // will work
> ?>
>
> b.php:
> <?php
>         declare(strict_types =3D 1);
>         require "lib.php";
>         foo("123"); // will give an error
> ?>
>
> This behavior is unacceptable.
> Caller (a.php, b.php) must satisfy lib.php expectation to make lib.php=

> work as it should. Otherwise, all kinds of unexpected for lib.php and =
 =

> it's
> users may happen.

When called from a.php, foo() will get and int(123), this is exactly wha=
t  =

is expected. Author of a.php acknowledges that all arguments in fcalls  =

 from this file will be converted to appropriate types, this is basicall=
y  =

how all our internal functions work currently and it's perfectly  =

acceptable. But if you don't want this kind of type juggling then you  =

opt-in strict types. This is basically as easy as it gets, I don't see a=
ny  =

way to make it simpler. There's nothing to evolve in this RFC, it covers=
  =

pretty much everything and the idea of allowing for caller to make a  =

decision is, in my opinion, a great win in this situation.