On 11 August 2010 19:20, Stas Malyshev <smalys...@sugarcrm.com> wrote: > I'm against it on sanity and logic grounds. I explained the reasons (for the > Nth time) above. If you still can't comprehend that there's logic behind > what I am saying and call it "ideology" - well, I guess there's a limit of > what one can explain.
I perfectly understand that there are reasons behind wanting the more relaxed "smartcasting" to be the only option but please go ahead and be condescending if you want. There is logic behind what you're saying: your logic. It's not a universal logic though, as evidenced by the lack of consensus. My point is this: Derick's proposal (which started this thread before it got forked somehow) was to allow everybody to have it their way. You are fighting tooth and nail to prevent that from happening, choosing instead to impose your logic and your definition of what is sound to the users. I call that ideology. My own ideology is to leave that choice to the users if it doesn't incur a high cost. That way, my ideology is more compatible with others'. Offering both typechecking and smartcasting is compatible with both groups of users, which, btw, do overlap to some extent; if the feature was available I'd use typechecking for internal functions and smartcasting for most of the public stuff, depending on what rules it follows. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
