"strict_types" should be renamed "raise_type_error". WAS: About declare(strict_types = 1)

Hi all,

I think this is important, but not many people realize the importance.
Therefore I created this as a new thread at the last minutes of vote.

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Dennis Birkholz dennis@birkholz.biz
wrote:

Am 16.03.2015 um 06:28 schrieb Xinchen Hui:

 lib.php
 <?php
   declare(strict_types = 1);
   function add(int $a, int $b) {
   }

 <?php
  add($_GET['a'], $_GET['b']);

 that means, I need to add a lots of (int) while I try to call a

function in a library which is not written by myself.

that is not right and has been discussed a thousand times over.
The declare changes the rules only for function calls in the file it is
declared in.

so:
lib.php:
<?php
declare(strict_types = 1);
function foo(int $a) {
// no function call here
}
?>
The declare here does just nothing.

<?php
require "lib.php";
foo("123"); // will work
?>

<?php
declare(strict_types = 1);
require "lib.php";
foo("123"); // will give an error
?>

If this kind of behavior is allowed, why "strict mode" is called strict?
It's not
strict at all if mode could be overridden.

"strict_mode" is just controlling errors, then it should be named as error
controlling directive and raise E_WARNING/E_TYPE or whatever.

Even if what its controlling is error that can be overridden by caller, yet
calling it "strict_types" is not correct. Proper name would be something
like "raise_type_error".

Let's see how it looks if "strict_types" is renamed to "raise_type_error"

<?php
declare(raise_type_error = 1);
function foo(int $a) {
// no function call here
}
?>
The declare here does just nothing.

<?php
require "lib.php";
foo("123"); // will work
?>

<?php
declare(raise_type_error = 1);
require "lib.php";
foo("123"); // will give an error
?>

Is everyone feel OK with this??

There are other things I would like to mention, but this would be enough
to change decision hopefully.

Regards,

P.S. If we are going to introduce strict types for basic types, what we
really need is type affinity for inputs. e.g. $_GET/$_POST/$_COOKIE.
https://www.sqlite.org/datatype3.html

--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohgaki@ohgaki.net

Hello,

this would make more sense than "strict types", which is a bad name
anyways (as I already mentioned in some other email) - because the
concept of non-week typing is usually called "strongly typed" in any
other language I can think of. Does PHP have to be a special
snowflake?

Regards
Pavel Kouril

Hi all,

I think this is important, but not many people realize the importance.
Therefore I created this as a new thread at the last minutes of vote.

...

"strict_mode" is just controlling errors, then it should be named as error
controlling directive and raise E_WARNING/E_TYPE or whatever.

Even if what its controlling is error that can be overridden by caller, yet
calling it "strict_types" is not correct. Proper name would be something
like "raise_type_error".

Let's see how it looks if "strict_types" is renamed to "raise_type_error"

...

<?php
declare(raise_type_error = 1);
require "lib.php";
foo("123"); // will give an error
?>

I agree that the name doesn't by itself explain the feature, but how
could it possibly? You'd end up with something like:

declare(raise_type_errors_on_parameter_mismatches_when_calling_functions_from_this_file_regardless_of_where_the_functions_are_defined_and_what_the_setting_is_in_other_files=1);

I don't think your suggestion explains the feature any better than
strict_types. (Although the irony of using =1 instead of =true isn't
lost on me!)

--
Matthew Leverton