On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Nikita Nefedov <inefe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 14:33:00 +0300, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohg...@ohgaki.net>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Derick,
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Derick Rethans <der...@php.net> wrote:
>>
>> To be frank, I don't think "I don't like this" is a terribly good reason
>>> to vote against (or for something). What is important is how many people
>>> would actually benefit from a feature, without it causing issues for
>>> others. I am certainly no fan of the "declare" *syntax*, but I do know,
>>> from talking at conferences that many many developers would like to see
>>> scalar type hints in some way — both weak (mode 1 of the STHv5 RFC), and
>>> strict (mode 2). It even caters for people that don't want to use them
>>> at all, as they can simply not use them. I also know, that without a
>>> dual mode, it seems very unlikely for scalar type hints to make it
>>> into PHP 7, and I don't think that is what users want. As this is our
>>> *best* bet, I can only vote "yes".
>>>
>>
>>
>> Are you sure on your bet?
>>
>> lib.php:
>> <?php
>> declare(strict_types = 1);
>> function foo(int $a) {
>> // no function call here
>> }
>> ?>
>> The declare here does just nothing.
>>
>> a.php:
>> <?php
>> require "lib.php";
>> foo("123"); // will work
>> ?>
>>
>> b.php:
>> <?php
>> declare(strict_types = 1);
>> require "lib.php";
>> foo("123"); // will give an error
>> ?>
>>
>> This behavior is unacceptable.
>> Caller (a.php, b.php) must satisfy lib.php expectation to make lib.php
>> work as it should. Otherwise, all kinds of unexpected for lib.php and it's
>> users may happen.
>>
>
> When called from a.php, foo() will get and int(123), this is exactly what
> is expected. Author of a.php acknowledges that all arguments in fcalls from
> this file will be converted to appropriate types, this is basically how all
> our internal functions work currently and it's perfectly acceptable. But if
> you don't want this kind of type juggling then you opt-in strict types.
> This is basically as easy as it gets, I don't see any way to make it
> simpler. There's nothing to evolve in this RFC, it covers pretty much
> everything and the idea of allowing for caller to make a decision is, in my
> opinion, a great win in this situation.
I already showed real world example how this could be fail.
If we need this kind of behavior. I would suggest to have type affinity
like SQLite for
$_GET/$_POST/$_COOKIE.
https://www.sqlite.org/datatype3.html
This would work better to work with strict types.
Regards,
--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohg...@ohgaki.net
