Hi Timm, > On 8 Feb 2015, at 12:04, Timm Friebe <p...@thekid.de> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I've been following the "Static type hints" discussion for a while now.
Presumably you mean "scalar" not "static". > Aside > from its content, which there are some strong sentiments about, there's also > another recurring pattern - the wish for voting options instead of just > "yes/no". > > Along these lines I've created an RFC on one aspect of primitive type hinting > (whether parameters or return type), namely reserving the primitive type > names: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reserve_primitives > > I personally see the benefits this could have but also the BC break this would > introduce. Let me know whether it's worthwhile putting this up for discussion. > I'm happy to add, elaborate or remove options as a result of feedback before > doing so. I don't see the point of this: the Scalar Type Hints RFC already has a voting option on reserving the type names, and it is set to pass, so by the time your RFC could go to a vote, it would have been rendered redundant. Thanks. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/
