Hello Jason, Monday, May 10, 2004, 5:31:38 PM, you wrote:
> Hello, > I've been following this discussion from the beginning. To be pointed, I > think that the whole matter is rather a serious case of "overfunctionality". > Consider allowing a type hint such as > function foo(MyClass $bar) > The only way I see that as being useful is to be able to assume that you > can safely say $bar->DoSomething() from within your function WITHOUT > FIRST HAVING TO write an if() statement that verifies that it is not null. > Even allowing null as a default parameter is somewhat disturbing. The > programmer should ditch the typehint if he needs any behavior other than > the one described above, and use a simple if() statement to find out if it > is the correct class. Until here i very much agree. To clearify: The reason i provided all the patches is that i simply want the descibed behavior as default and if at all a syntax addition to allow NULL explicitly. > If it is deemed necessary to allow a NULL default parameter, then let's > keep it simple - function foo(MyClass $bar = NULL) As i pointed out before this solution comes with a slight disadvantage and it also contains some magic. It is simply semantically very different from secifying the allowed types and setting a default value. Combining them is therefore magic that is hard to understand. > IMHO, PHP has always been a language that can be used very simply, but > still has the low-level power to accommodate all the other things that one > wishes to accomplish. Let's keep it that way. Yes we have very good solution which one must not use. In C++ or Java you are forced to use all the syntax or you will fail. best regards marcus -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
