Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94453
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.161.181 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <60AC7828-990B-4B6D-A122-AB9C15C6DEAE@trowski.com>
References: <CAFMT4Noe07E9--sasW-Fiw5B1hFFZbXDG2_wumkfZCbqM9wh7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NpooxRgd2g9eP_Ruw7f0Bfk20gF5qHbEFPscxCwt52awQ@mail.gmail.com> <60AC7828-990B-4B6D-A122-AB9C15C6DEAE@trowski.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 17:03:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CAF+90c-1bF35nzEF2UMqukvTr4PnrZHeVQjNmK+JPO11mZih2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aaron Piotrowski <aaron@trowski.com>
Cc: Levi Morrison <levim@php.net>, internals <internals@lists.php.net>, 
	Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org>, Davey Shafik <davey@php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e630e7b54be0537353980
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][Vote] ReflectionType Improvements
From: nikita.ppv@gmail.com (Nikita Popov)

--001a114e630e7b54be0537353980
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Aaron Piotrowski <aaron@trowski.com> wrote:

> >
> > On Jul 9, 2016, at 8:17 AM, Levi Morrison <levim@php.net> wrote:
> >>
> >
> > The final vote was 5 in favor and 8 against. This RFC has been rejected.
> >
>
> While this RFC was rejected, ReflectionType::__toString() should still be
> updated to include a ? for nullable types. This is a consequence of the
> nullable types RFC. As mentioned in this RFC [1], the string representation
> of ReflectionType should be a syntax-valid representation of the type.
> Without adding ?, this will no longer be true. I do not view this as a BC
> break. In fact, it is a BC break for PHPUnit, PHPSpec, and Mockery to not
> make this change, as they currently depend on the string representation of
> ReflectionType to generate code compatible with the parent class or
> interface.
>
> Additionally, I propose adding a getName() method to ReflectionType that
> returns only the name of the type, regardless of nullability. Casting
> should not be required to get information from an object, but currently
> this is the only way to get the type name from ReflectionType. Most other
> reflection classes include a getName() method, this seems to have been an
> oversight.
>
> Joe and Davey, what are your thoughts on this?
>
> Aaron Piotrowski
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reflectiontypeimprovements#backward_incompatible_changes
>

I agree with this suggestion.

Nikita

--001a114e630e7b54be0537353980--