On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:30, Theodore Brown <theodor...@outlook.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:24 PM Matthew Brown <matthewmatt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 12:55, Theodore Brown <theodor...@outlook.com> > wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:06 AM Matthew Brown < > matthewmatt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hey everyone! > > > > > > > > The vote for adding noreturn is now open: > > > > > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/noreturn_type > > > > > > > > Voting will run through April 13th > > > > > > Hi Matt and Ondrej, > > > > > > Thanks for your work on this RFC. I voted for `never` as the type name > > > because it's more amenable to future use cases like compile-time > > > exhaustiveness checks (example: > > > > https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/2/narrowing.html#the-never-type > ). > > > > > > As a bonus `never` is more concise, avoids mashing two words together, > > > and aligns with TypeScript, which I and many other PHP devs also use. > > > > Awesome! The conciseness argument for "never" is already mentioned in > > the RFC, as is TypeScript's use of the term. > > > > Full disclosure (because neither of us is eligible to vote): > > I slightly prefer "noreturn", and Ondrej strongly prefers "never". > > Hi Matt, > > I'm confused by this. If Ondrej strongly prefers `never`, why does the > RFC say "we believe `noreturn` is the best name for this type"? > > It might be better to just remove this sentence, or else list your > separate preferences. > > Thanks, > Theodore I've removed that sentence. Opinions evolved — I wrote the RFC with the original language favouring "noreturn", Ondrej edited it, adding more arguments for "never". Since we published the RFC some in the community have validated his arguments, and I think Ondrej's opinion has become stronger as a result (and mine has become weaker). Whatever happens, I think we care much more that this passes than what it's exactly called. Best wishes, Matt
