Well said, John! I think that's a terrific idea! --Kris
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM, John Crenshaw <johncrens...@priacta.com>wrote: > > From: Kris Craig [mailto:kris.cr...@gmail.com] > > > > I actually agree as well. Looking back in the thread, I think my overly > > broad use of the word "strict" might have led to some confusion over what > > I'm advocating. > > Honestly, this is the biggest problem that the typing debates have had. > Someone advocates "strict typing" when they really mean "weak typing" (as > opposed to the current "dynamic typing") but there's always a group of > people that assume they mean "strict strict strict typing like the old C > days". People then panic and get frustrated because the plethora of > problems with adding this level of restriction to PHP have already been > discussed extensively. Discussion then devolves into denigration and then > finally disintegrates completely. > > If we can agree on some basic terminology I think it would move things > forward considerably. I propose these terms: > - "Strict Typing" means the super strict old C style typing that has been > proven to be ridiculous in this environment because of the obvious problems > inherent in the fact that almost every input is a string. > - "Weak Typing" means types in the same sense that the PHP documentation > uses types (for example, the docs indicate substr(string, integer), and > substr(12345, "2") == "345".) > - "No Scalar Typing" should be used to indicate the current system (where > there is no provision for hinting at scalar types.) > > In addition, if someone potentially new expresses support for "Strict > Typing", let's assume that they really mean weak typing unless proven > otherwise (this is by far the more likely intent.) Politely clarify > terminology so that everyone can be on the same page. If someone still > insists that they want "Strict Typing", point them to the prior discussions > on the topic which explain exactly what the problems with this are. > > It might be wise to maintain a wiki article to keep track of the 3 > different levels of typing, as well as a summary of the typical arguments > pro and con for each of the 3. If people agree that this would be helpful, > I'm willing to dig through the archives and try to put this together. > > John Crenshaw > Priacta, Inc. >
