Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:92117
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <57001915.3030407@telia.com>
References: <CABDNdAHwgx+LJRc_gi9citiypxxWVGFMB+6hrmU+vVYDWCDV_g@mail.gmail.com>
	<3F.70.02405.6803BE65@pb1.pair.com>
	<56F01545.8080008@gmail.com>
	<CAF+90c-Z82kBT18ivvKejD5_dBf=dtbNYN-cZcyO1K=0C1WcLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<56F14572.701@gmail.com>
	<56F15EF5.80006@telia.com>
	<56F16023.1010002@gmail.com>
	<CAPhkiZxYwXKLp8ASkjiwXgzDtjKxJ8rYROCM-t=8sU5=efhg2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPhkiZwOJOkNu4N=h+wQRX4w8-KV=zg9x4khhLRLu199YcqZxw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABDNdAGh4OjkkEQim6oYK=sZ=zj1Q==HzE=SLJ1E8=a=ku1DqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CY1PR0201MB17863E4B9D9F53151A900DCDBF870@CY1PR0201MB1786.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<CAL=_i_mNwmpg0PWmrm3nTZxn6s33u2QUzavk8w0Fk1OGvbWJtA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CY1PR0201MB1786AAFDC6170AB1585CA7F5BF870@CY1PR0201MB1786.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<CY1PR0201MB17867DAC10D401EE9EC49CBCBF870@CY1PR0201MB1786.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<CAL=_i_knwzrcXdx1k4ii8YKzrgaREBFcHYGC9ZV_J05ZWVWmzg@mail.gmail.com>
	<56FC4ED6.6050701@telia.com>
	<CAL=_i_ksOzCV1SUtB2jwSYPm1SL2y3jy43+JSZ3k6KRywsizUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<57001915.3030407@telia.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 12:33:48 -0400
Message-ID: <CABDNdAHMrY36PakuwqRpdMKPf=LxeNDRvp0u2CRuBtsdG2di0A@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Larsson?= <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com>
Cc: Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org>, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>, Krakjo <krakjoe@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 Discussion] Typed Properties
From: pjsturgeon@gmail.com (Phil Sturgeon)

On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Bj=C3=B6rn Larsson <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.c=
om> wrote:
> Good evening,Den 2016-03-31 kl. 10:34, skrev Joe Watkins:
>>
>> Morning,
>>
>>> Given that public is implied for all properties above there
>>> is a value in having the same rule for type.
>>
>> public $bar, int $foo;
>>
>> What does this mean?
>>
>> If it's not an error, what does this mean ?
>>
>> public $bar, int $foo, $qux;
>>
>> If it's an error, why is it an error ?
>>
>> Both of these examples are just as ambiguous as
>>
>> public int $foo, $bar, $qux;
>>
>> Access modifiers are assumed to apply to all declarations in a group,
>> because that's what grouping is actually for.
>>
>> We don't need to make grouping about types, we need to make type
>> declarations unambiguous.
>
> I think by issuing an error on the two first one we make the
> third one unambiguous. It also makes it a bit easier to explain
> and remember rules for visibility and type keywords before
> a list of properties, i.e. they are close to the same.
>
> Having the public keyword optional would be nice, but then
> as you say it should be the same for untyped properties.
>
>>> Anyway, in Hack following syntax passes: https://3v4l.org/3tUu9
>>
>> Hack does not consider types implicitly nullable.
>>
>> <?hh
>> class Foo {
>>    public int $int =3D null;
>>    public stdClass $std =3D null;
>> }
>>
>> things.php:3:10,12: Wrong type hint (Typing[4110])
>>    things.php:3:10,12: This is an int
>>    things.php:3:21,24: It is incompatible with a nullable type
>> things.php:4:10,17: Wrong type hint (Typing[4110])
>>    things.php:4:10,17: This is an object of type stdClass
>>    things.php:4:26,29: It is incompatible with a nullable type
>>
>> <?hh
>> function foo(int $int =3D null, stdClass $std =3D null) {}
>>
>> things.php:2:18,21: Wrong type hint (Typing[4110])
>>    things.php:2:14,16: This is an int
>>    things.php:2:25,28: It is incompatible with a nullable type
>> things.php:2:40,43: Wrong type hint (Typing[4110])
>>    things.php:2:31,38: This is an object of type stdClass
>>    things.php:2:47,50: It is incompatible with a nullable type
>>
>> HHVM doesn't care about types ... we don't compare our type system to th=
at
>> ...
>
> I rest my case here :-)
>
> Regards //Bj=C3=B6rn
>


We polled pretty hard and had a bunch of discussions about how
multiple declarations should work, and ended up siding with Zeev and
Larry, and all those others saying that type declarations should work
for all just as visibility does currently:


public int $foo, $bar;

$bar here will be int.

Trying to specify another type will resolve in an error. RFC is
updated to match.

We have a few more implementation tweaks to make, then it's off to the
races with this one.