Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85182
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.43 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACwt+JdBDN95uN8csq5UaELozj3P4wbswhaYxvZ2hqh5JjALLw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAyV7nEtdFSdPMieK0EvdO+moCqDw7KH59=Lr3+pA10rn=isoQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB6YZuzrokpubXKKOzeM5tH=n2K6WPfX+YDwyKb4tByg33G7zw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACwt+JdBDN95uN8csq5UaELozj3P4wbswhaYxvZ2hqh5JjALLw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 12:31:17 +0100
Message-ID: <CAB6YZuzkxWWq7ZA29TZVDsX7zBaEMvUGU7MC0gyuZHyZMNpqMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Patrick ALLAERT <patrickallaert@php.net>
Cc: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11358876ee42d605118e6baa
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Accepted] Scalar Type Declarations V0.5
From: pajousek@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pavel_Kou=C5=99il?=)

--001a11358876ee42d605118e6baa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wednesday, March 18, 2015, Patrick ALLAERT <patrickallaert@php.net>
wrote:
> Le mer. 18 mars 2015 =C3=A0 10:56, Pavel Kou=C5=99il <pajousek@gmail.com>=
 a =C3=A9crit :
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> how will these examples work btw?
>>
>> // a.php
>> <?php
>> declare(strict_types=3D1);
>> function foo($fn) {
>>     $fn("1");
>> };
>>
>> // b.php
>> <?php
>> require 'a.php';
>> foo(function (int $a) { return $a * 2; });
>>
>>
>>
>> // c.php
>> <?php
>> function foo($fn) {
>>     $fn("1");
>> };
>>
>> // d.php
>> <?php
>> declare(strict_types=3D1);
>> require 'c.php';
>> foo(function (int $a) { return $a * 2; });
>>
>> I can't find this in the RFC. I'd intuitively expect error in the
>> first example and the second one to work OK.
>
> Your intuition is correct.
>
>>
>> But at the same time, if there will be an error in the first example,
>> it is IMHO a huge flaw with this RFC. :/
>
> Flaw vs. design choice. This is one of the reason that this aspect,
amongst others, has been very debated.

But if it works this way, the strict mode isn't optional and users of a
library NEED to care which mode the library uses?

--001a11358876ee42d605118e6baa--