[RFC][PRE-VOTE] Reserving More Types in PHP 7 View as Markdown

2015-03-14 23:30 GMT+01:00 Rasmus Lerdorf rasmus@lerdorf.com:

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Bob Weinand bobwei9@hotmail.com
wrote:

Am 14.03.2015 um 10:21 schrieb Pavel Kouřil pajousek@gmail.com:

RFC Link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reserve_more_types_in_php_7

The proposal has changed from the original. It no longer reserves the
aliases out of the interest of reserving the smallest useful,
uncontroversial subset. Some people want to remove aliases for these
types so in the interest of being as uncontroversial as possible I am
no longer proposing to remove them.

This will go into voting on March 15th unless something comes up
between now and then to persuade me otherwise.

--

Hello,

why do you consider a "true" and "false" as a type? It's not a type.
it's a
value?

Regards
Pavel Kouril

These aren't types. But useful for e.g. union types (int|false). [By
the way they're internally handled as different types… but that's an
implementation detail…]

Also, he doesn't call them anywhere types, it's just the title.

Bob

This is a solid plan. Vote this and everyone should +1 it, so if this
scalar squabble results in a a 0-0-0 score we can at least add scalars
later.

This is not quite that obvious I don't think. If
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/context_sensitive_lexer isn't ready in time for
7.0 and we don't need to reserve these for one of the STH RFCs then we
should hold off and do it alongside the context sensitive lexer change
or we are going to needlessly break a ton of code including Drupal8:

https://github.com/drupal/drupal/blob/8.0.x/core/lib/Drupal/Component/Utility/String.php#L15

-Rasmus

Rasmus, the context sensitive lexer doesn't change anything for Drupal.
Support for class names has been dropped, see
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/context_sensitive_lexer#rejected_features

Regards, Niklas

Am 14.03.2015 um 10:21 schrieb Pavel Kouřil pajousek@gmail.com:

RFC Link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reserve_more_types_in_php_7

The proposal has changed from the original. It no longer reserves the
aliases out of the interest of reserving the smallest useful,
uncontroversial subset. Some people want to remove aliases for these
types so in the interest of being as uncontroversial as possible I am
no longer proposing to remove them.

This will go into voting on March 15th unless something comes up
between now and then to persuade me otherwise.

--

Hello,

why do you consider a "true" and "false" as a type? It's not a type. it's a
value?

Regards
Pavel Kouril

These aren't types. But useful for e.g. union types (int|false). [By the way they're internally handled as different types… but that's an implementation detail…]

Also, he doesn't call them anywhere types, it's just the title.

Bob

This is a solid plan. Vote this and everyone should +1 it, so if this
scalar squabble results in a a 0-0-0 score we can at least add scalars
later.

This is not quite that obvious I don't think. If
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/context_sensitive_lexer isn't ready in time for
7.0 and we don't need to reserve these for one of the STH RFCs then we
should hold off and do it alongside the context sensitive lexer change
or we are going to needlessly break a ton of code including Drupal8:

https://github.com/drupal/drupal/blob/8.0.x/core/lib/Drupal/Component/Utility/String.php#L15

-Rasmus

I respect this opinion, though I disagree. I do agree that breaks in
backwards compatibility should not be taken lightly; I think we just
disagree on the magnitude of both the breaks and the gains.

Am 14.03.2015 um 10:21 schrieb Pavel Kouřil pajousek@gmail.com:

RFC Link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reserve_more_types_in_php_7

The proposal has changed from the original. It no longer reserves the
aliases out of the interest of reserving the smallest useful,
uncontroversial subset. Some people want to remove aliases for these
types so in the interest of being as uncontroversial as possible I am
no longer proposing to remove them.

This will go into voting on March 15th unless something comes up
between now and then to persuade me otherwise.

--

Hello,

why do you consider a "true" and "false" as a type? It's not a type. it's a
value?

Regards
Pavel Kouril

These aren't types. But useful for e.g. union types (int|false). [By the way they're internally handled as different types… but that's an implementation detail…]

Also, he doesn't call them anywhere types, it's just the title.

Bob

This is a solid plan. Vote this and everyone should +1 it, so if this
scalar squabble results in a a 0-0-0 score we can at least add scalars
later.

This is not quite that obvious I don't think. If
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/context_sensitive_lexer isn't ready in time for
7.0 and we don't need to reserve these for one of the STH RFCs then we
should hold off and do it alongside the context sensitive lexer change
or we are going to needlessly break a ton of code including Drupal8:

https://github.com/drupal/drupal/blob/8.0.x/core/lib/Drupal/Component/Utility/String.php#L15

Rasmus (and others),

How would you feel about emitting E_DEPRECATED whenever one of
these[1] names is used for a class declaration? Emitting E_DEPRECATED
is less helpful but less painful. It's not my preference (just like
emitting E_DEPRECATED for PHP 4 constructors was not my preference)
but ultimately I care about the eventual result. I'm happy to wait as
long as we've agreed to fix it eventually.

Of course, if a scalar types RFC passes most of these will be reserved
anyway. Right now it is a coin toss if Anthony's proposal will pass
(it keeps flipping back and forth).

[1] int, float, bool, string, true, false, null