Hi Stas,

> On 14 Jan 2015, at 23:29, Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree. Being wrong is bad, making a mistake is bad, but having split
> personality language and not knowing in which world you are - or even
> worse, having to deal with both worlds in the same code and being thrown
> back and forth between them by some little switch which is easy to miss
> - IMO is worse. I don't like strict typing in PHP because I think it is
> contrary to the idea of how dynamic languages should work, but I'd
> rather have that then two sets of rules living within the same code,
> especially when looking at the function I can't even know how it would
> work without checking if there's a declare hiding somewhere. And
> refactoring becomes a nightmare - what if I moved function from strict
> world to non-strict world or vice versa?

It’s not about the location of the function, but the call site. You can place a 
function anywhere and it will behave identically.

> I also agree with Dmitry in other thread - if some conv rules are so bad
> everybody hates them (or at least you think it is the case :), we can
> change them. We are already on that track with some weird ones like
> array->string. Even with BC effects, IMO better than too many sets of
> rules.

There are some minor issues with the conversion rules that could be fixed, but 
a lot of people have a problem not just with the conversion rules, but with the 
implicit conversion itself. The previous RFC (Scalar Type Hinting with Casts) 
wasn’t popular with many people for that reason: sure, it had stricter rules, 
but that won’t please people who want no conversion whatsoever.

Thanks.
--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/





--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to