On 22 April 2025 14:37:48 BST, "Gina P. Banyard" <intern...@gpb.moe> wrote:
>Having talked with Arnaud off-list, it seems that using the "usual" generic
>syntax of (assuming our parser can cope with it):
>```
>interface I<T : int|string> {
> public function foo(T $param): T;
>}
>class CS implements I<string> {
> public function foo(string $param): string {
> return $param . '!';
> }
>}
>```
>is possible and would not conflict with any future proposal for generics.
I think if this works, it would be a really great step towards generics, where
some use cases would be possible, and some would have easier work arounds than
today. Possibly we could slowly add places the syntax is allowed, where we can
make it make sense without tackling the tricky parts like variance/inheritance
and type inference.
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]
