> On 13 בפבר׳ 2015, at 13:13, Andrea Faulds <a...@ajf.me> wrote: > > Hi, > >> On 13 Feb 2015, at 09:37, Patrick ALLAERT <patrickalla...@php.net> wrote: >> >> Voted "no" because of the reasons already mentioned by a bunch of others >> here. >> >> Weak type hint as presented earlier: +1 (and very good job Andrea about >> that!). >> declare(strict_types=1): -1, not only about the syntax, but also about the >> mixed mode it introduces. >> >> I'm pretty confident that this RFC will "pass" with just above 2/3 of >> majority while it could reach much more. >> >> I am pretty sure that if this RFC doesn't include a strict type mode _the >> way it is proposed_ (or even, not at all, as part of another related RFC), >> it would have some "no" converted to "yes" and would have a wider adoption, >> which is for sure a better option than relying on a voting mechanism which >> still is a supporting tool, we're not politicians after all :) > > It wouldn’t have wider adoption. Excluding a large portion of the PHP > community (which favours strict types) and giving them something which > doesn’t work for their use cases (weak types) is not going to win any fans.
Any fans? Really? How about we put it to a test instead of guessing the outcome? Zeev
