So to get it clear for everyone: the right way is for internals to ignore community as a whole, stick to their own views and implement something nobody actually wants - just because there is no time - on the idea that "something is better than nothing"?
Without pointing any fingers it sure looks like a stalling tactic where someone eventually gets what they want. Highly disappointed on this outcome. On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Eli <e...@eliw.com> wrote: > Not that another +1 is needed, but I'm with Andi here. I do personally > like this 3rd proposal as an option, if nothing else because it > implements the 'simpler base' at the moment, and allows us, once people > are used to this being part of the language, to continue to evolve > later. And that evolution can be based upon our real world experience > of using this 'base level' of typehinting for a while. > > Versus the more complicated versions, of which both Zeev's and Anthony's > are. In each their own way. > > Eli > > On 3/13/15 1:17 AM, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > Agree and I would vote +1 on this even if I'd prefer coercive. It is a > > very valid option for a 7.0 and it is future proof. > > -- > | Eli White | http://eliw.com/ | Twitter: EliW | > > >
