Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94208
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmx.de designates 212.227.15.19 as permitted sender)
To: Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk>, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk>
References: <CAL=_i_ndnBUEHUcNxPJxxkhZ70jM4xE-xkjuftWpHHNSKMchOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <BY2PR0201MB1784884D794E3FF56E08D124BF500@BY2PR0201MB1784.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAGa2bXY+xKNRn+Z28QJOkLrdWunNR7QcNn8XXuHDp2ws4exXcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_h_TRUJqezT-zan6WWXAcZvnD9DPwY1H=ZH+RjtYE8PSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL=_i_nga8CO9qrJ-KAa8UKhSBudBj-SerFHLAU175SRQsbW+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdc3Wo8qOf+sTRXGTHDKrLijGJj5aUQZqJhe3byn1-F4Ev1tQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <576A6165.8090904@lsces.co.uk>
 <CADqTB_gmAHEO=NUxzqtv9iYs8ovzM2432OFoEXOb0yuf3SrrSA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <d00e5a8f-d1c4-5eb9-1d4e-505b90e520ca@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 18:20:39 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADqTB_gmAHEO=NUxzqtv9iYs8ovzM2432OFoEXOb0yuf3SrrSA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Vote] Typed Properties
From: cmbecker69@gmx.de (Christoph Becker)

On 22.06.2016 at 17:58, Rasmus Schultz wrote:

> Give them a consistent language and new developers will rise to the
> occasion - I'm sure of it. You're just not giving them a chance.
> Type-hinted properties are a step towards fixing that situation - they
> don't add, they *remove* complexity and learning curve from the
> language.
> 
> Consistency, when it comes to languages, is always simpler and less
> surprising than inconsistency.

ACK.

> PHP *has* type-checks - the introduction of property type-hints is not
> a new feature, it's fixing an inconsistency.

I'd argue that the current proposal brings new inconsistencies, namely
that you can type properties (besides already supported parameters), but
not other variables (okay, these are not properties, but still), no
static properties and there are restrictions regarding references to
typed properties.  In my opinion, these restrictions can be very
confusing for users – one already sufficient reason for me to abstain
from voting on a feature I'd like in principle.

-- 
Christoph M. Becker