"guilhermebla...@gmail.com" <guilhermebla...@gmail.com> schreef op 13 maart 
2015 18:57:35 GMT+00:00:
>+1 on this, as this is more inline with how ZPP currently works,
>creating
>less headaches to end users.
>
>On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Stelian Mocanita <steli...@php.net>
>wrote:
>
>> 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   |
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>

Chance of this RFC passing is going to be slim, as it only caters for one of 
the three groups that Antony described...

I certainly will vote against it.

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to