Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93424
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain pthreads.org from 209.85.161.174 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3df2a206-3bcc-df58-5f54-6047eb59bfa3@thefsb.org>
References: <CAL=_i_mcJoFnPgeU5FQCJN=SDYnNK7Jz8zoVMv9EMuWaGRYSMg@mail.gmail.com>
	<3df2a206-3bcc-df58-5f54-6047eb59bfa3@thefsb.org>
Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 07:10:42 +0100
Message-ID: <CAL=_i_nYvVYCfmdsxrmCpzRG=TpNn6rBx=Swv99xWTrKEHS7Nw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Worster <fsb@thefsb.org>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Phil Sturgeon <pjsturgeon@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c05581e2fbf81053354116c
Subject: Re: [RFC][Vote] Typed Properties
From: pthreads@pthreads.org (Joe Watkins)

--94eb2c05581e2fbf81053354116c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Morning Tom,

> I guess yes on both to be consistent with coercion on function invocation
but I couldn't find this mentioned in the RFC.

Correct. I only made brief mention that the rules for coercion and
strictness are reused.

Cheers
Joe

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 6:59 PM, Tom Worster <fsb@thefsb.org> wrote:

> On 5/20/16 2:05 AM, Joe Watkins wrote:
>
>> Morning internals,
>>
>>     Since we have our answer on nullable types, typed properties can now
>> go
>> to vote.
>>
>>     https://wiki.php.net/rfc/typed-properties#vote
>>
>>     Note that, support for nullability as RFC'd will be merged when the
>> implementation for nullable_types is merged into master.
>>
>>     Please participate.
>>
>
> I lack suffrage but I have a question about coercion and strictness.
>
> When I assign a value to a property declared with scalar type, is it the
> strictness of the file containing the assignment that controls if coercion
> happens or not? And is the strictness of the file containing the
> declaration irrelevant?
>
> I guess yes on both to be consistent with coercion on function invocation
> but I couldn't find this mentioned in the RFC.
>
> Tom
>
>

--94eb2c05581e2fbf81053354116c--