Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91692
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.169 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:36:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CABDNdAHwgx+LJRc_gi9citiypxxWVGFMB+6hrmU+vVYDWCDV_g@mail.gmail.com>
To: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: [RFC Discussion] Typed Properties
From: pjsturgeon@gmail.com (Phil Sturgeon)

Hello everyone,

I have completed the draft for an RFC, to add Typed Properties. The
patch has been written by the one and only Joe Watkins.

https://wiki.php.net/rfc/typed-properties

I would really appreciate constructive feedback on this RFC, with a
few areas especially:

1. How scared are we that integers can be expanded to floats on runtime?

2. This whole temporary nullability situation, where unset properties
will error on attempted usage if not set. Should they instead error
after the constructor has been called if they are still not holding a
value?

3. Weak vs Strict. Right now this is entirely strict, with no
declare() to change mode. Reasons for this vary, from various sources,
but include "Not sure how to implement it" and "Well people should not
be using properties as part of their public API".

Help on 3 would be appreciated.

Also let's please avoid "PHP IS TURNING INTO JAVA" and the other
rather common rhetoric. Strict Type Hinting might have been seen as a
battleground for fans of strict and fans of weak to fight through a
keyboard, but this RFC will not be the repeat.

We'll have a nice, orderly, constructive conversation about this RFC,
and improve the patch as you all provide feedback.

Let me know what you think folks!