On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Alain Williams <a...@phcomp.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 02:19:15PM +0200, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
> > > function foo(int $a)
> > > {
> > > var $b; // $b has no type hinting
> > > var float $c; // $c is a float
> > > string $d; // alternative to the syntax used for $c (see
> below)
> > > }
>
> > I think it would be better to reuse declare() instead of reusing var.
>
> As a matter of curiosity, why ?
>
> The nice thing about 'var' is that it is the syntax used by other
> languages, eg
> Javascript.
>
in javascript var itself only defines the variable scope/context.
what you really proposing here is "strict" mode (use strict in javascript),
and for that declare would be suitable, as that is the current method of
passing information for the compiler about a file or a codeblock.
>
> > What error level would it emit though?
> > I anything below E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR, then it doesn't do anything, but
> > prints a line to the error log(and or displays it), which we already do,
> > because using an undefined variable will emit an E_NOTICE
> > I think it is a good thing if we make it easier to spot programming
> errors
> > and bail out early instead of trying to guess the developer's intention,
> > but I don't think that adding more fatal errors or
> > E_RECOVERABLE_ERRORs(which will be fatal if there is no userland error
> > handler defined which explicitly allows to continue the execution).
>
> This sort of error should be picked up the first time that the script is
> compiled, it does not need to be executed (other than conditional
> includes).
> This means that these errors will be picked up very quickly.
>
>
that's true, but you didn't really answered my question about the error
level.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
