> Am 11.03.2015 um 23:23 schrieb Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com>: > On Mar 12, 2015 8:30 AM, "Bob Weinand" <bobw...@hotmail.com > <mailto:bobw...@hotmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > after all, some people are not happy with the current proposals about > > scalar types. So, they both still possibly may fail. > > > > Thus, I'd like to come up with a fallback proposal in case both proposals > > fail: > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/basic_scalar_types > > <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/basic_scalar_types> > > > > It shouldn't prevent any future improvements and still give use all the > > advantages of scalar types. > > Besides what I think of proposing yet another RFC, -1 because it is basically > what the initial idea from the opponents of optional strict mode wanted > before they go with the latest one. It also totally ignore what the Anthony's > proposes. > Correct. It's just for the case where the other two fail. We still can add strict mode in a later version if people need it. All the RFC does is the most basic scalar type hinting you can build everything on. (for example adding the declare(strict_types=1); would work without any BC break on top of it)
I see that it doesn't fit all the users, but there's still room for improvement in later versions. Bob
