Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:92398 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 84934 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2016 08:00:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Apr 2016 08:00:12 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.214 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.214 mail4-2.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.214] ([217.147.176.214:39302] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 33/21-11975-A0494175 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 04:00:11 -0400 Received: (qmail 17864 invoked by uid 89); 18 Apr 2016 08:00:07 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 17830, pid: 17861, t: 0.0580s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.7?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.153.92.101) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 18 Apr 2016 08:00:07 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <57103A46.6040803@garfieldtech.com> <5710BA79.5060108@lsces.co.uk> <57110DC5.8000007@garfieldtech.com> <571338E6.50507@fleshgrinder.com> <57145AF7.7060607@garfieldtech.com> Message-ID: <57149405.2040701@lsces.co.uk> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 09:00:05 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57145AF7.7060607@garfieldtech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 18/04/16 04:56, Larry Garfield wrote: > 2) Doesn't make it quite so easy, which hopefully discourages (but does > not prohibit) its usage. This implies that using 'null' is wrong ... and is a slippery slope to then 'disabling' null where some people think it should be removed. If PHP development is making these sort of decisions it should be clear that is the intention, not just 'hopefully discourages' things that some people have no appreciation of the usefulness of! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk