> So, controversy is where a lot of people disagree - and there were > numerous > people in the original thread who disagreed with the RFC and preferred > strict > types. I actually tallied them in a reply to Zeev (which I later quoted in > a reply > to Andi). There were almost as many people against the proposal as in > favour. This is to say nothing as to how it was received outside internals > which, from my experience on reddit, Twitter and StackOverflow, was even > less positive than internals, considerably so. > > So, I think that to say that there was “zero controversy” is certainly > stretching the truth. Really, I’m yet to see any scalar type hinting > discussions > which haven’t had some controversy.
It's not stretching the truth or even slightly bending it, considering the RFC currently being voted on is a superset of that RFC. There's zero or virtually zero controversy surrounding the weak typing RFC, the one that was v0.1. The controversy wasn't (and isn't) about what was in v0.1, but rather, about what wasn't in there, namely, strict typing; Not in the contents of the v0.1 RFC itself, which, again, had zero controversy around and is effectively being voted on as an integral part of the current RFC. You have virtually all of the supporters of strict typing voting in favor of the current RFC, also voting in favor of the v0.1 elements which are an integral part of it. The way it should have went is voting on the weak typing RFC, around which there was (and probably still is) almost consensus. Right afterwards, vote on the strict elements that you added in v0.2. That would have been the one way to know what the voter base truly thinks. Right now, I believe many people are voting in favor thinking that otherwise we'd get nothing, and again - pretty much nobody is supportive of 'nothing'. Zeev -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
