Hi!
I'm well aware that this has been discussed before, Stas. However, you're mischaracterizing those previous conversations. It has never been proven that optional strict typing doesn't work. You've made the same arguments against it, but those arguments have counter-arguments that are also viable.
I'm not sure what you mean by "proven". You expect rigorous mathematical proof? You're not getting one. If you have something new to say with regard to the arguments that were brought up 10 times already - ok, go ahead. But please read them first.
people keep asking for it. It keeps coming up because, despite belittling and dismissive comments made by yourself and a few others, people continue to see that there is, in fact, a valid argument for implementing this. It shows that you have never been able to convince those who don't already agree with you that this is impossible.
Or it's coming up because people don't bother to read past discussions and think they are first who thought "let's put strict typing in PHP" and only reason why it's not there because nobody was smart enough to think about it. It's not so. It was repeatedly discussed and rediscussed. If you have new argument - fine, we'd all be happy to hear it. So far I didn't hear one though. Please let us hear it.
remotely like that. On the contrary, the PHP language would remain largely unchanged; we'd merely be adding a new element to it.
It doesn't work that way. Language is a complex construct, with all parts influencing each other, thinking you can just add strict typing somewhere in the corner and nothing changes is a dangerous illusion. It would not work. If you type function arguments, you should also type all the variables that could end up as the function arguments, all the functions returning into those arguments and all the operators and functions that do any transformations over those things. Otherwise it is guaranteed to blow up in runtime. After doing that, you've got yourself a strictly typed language. Absent compiler, though, such language would be quite hard to operate - how do you know your code correctly uses all the types some library wants? How do you know next version doesn't change any types without you noticing? etc., etc.
Furthermore, I have spoken to numerous people who have complained about PHP code being overly bulky and/or difficult to read due to its mandatory dynamic typing. Your counter-argument to that was,
I think these people are mistaken. PHP code, as in any language, may be well written or purely written, however this has nothing to do with dynamic typing. There are dynamically and statically typed languages, both have their uses. Static typing is well fit for compiled languages since compiling allows pre-execution type control and thus ensures no surprises in runtime. If you would like to explain yourself more in detail and specifically describe which code is "bulky and hard to read" due to dynamic typing - please do so.
essentially, "Yeah, well they're all stupid!" No, they're not. They
If you're going to distort my words and assign me things that I never said I would just stop this discussion and instead will silently delete everything you send. No sane discussion can be held in this manner, so please show respect to yourself and everybody participating and never do this again.
And again, you're using the, "If you don't like PHP, then get the hell out and use a different language," argument (i.e. "If one needs strict typed compiled language, one knows where to find plenty of them."). As I said in a previous post, that argument carries ZERO weight with me, and I'm not the only one who feels that way.
PHP is built on a certain principles, and people that build and maintain PHP would like to continue developing it along these principles. You think the proper language should be based on different set of principles - it is your right, however this language would not be PHP. There's nothing wrong with that, and pointing out that fact is not "dismissive". It is just a reminder that each language should have some principles. If you want to discuss why these principles are there - fine, but I mus warn you that it is rather unlikely that these principles will be thrown out and replaced with entirely new ones.
should be discussed. So let's drop the arrogant, "We've already talked about this stupid thing before," crap right here and now because it's not going to change anything.
I would also ask you to please amend your tone and avoid name-calling, swearing and otherwise rude expressions on the list. I understand that some topics can make one passionate, however I think remaining within the bounds of polite and civilized tone of discussion is not too much to ask.
-- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
