> On Aug 14, 2019, at 11:14, Derick Rethans <der...@php.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > In the last week(s) there has been a lot of chat about Zeev's P++ idea. > Before we end up spending this project's time and energy to explore this > idea further, I thought it'd be wise to see if there is enough animo for > this. Hence, I've created a document in the wiki as a poll: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/p-plus-plus
I voted "no." While I've not contributed to the discussions here, I've been following them and also reading what many on Twitter have been saying. I'll admit, I liked the idea of P++ for the novelty of it, but as the past has proven, we can continue to provide greater type safety in PHP, while retaining the dynamic character and flexibility that many enjoy. In short, the internals team has done a great job of allowing us to have our cake and eat it, too. Sara shared this a few days ago, and I’d like to reiterate it: > Strict(er) typing - I'm not sure, on the surface, what future expansions > we'd plan for in this area which couldn't fit into standard PHP in a non > BC-breaking way. There have been a few people on Twitter floating up the idea of something like TypeScript for PHP. This might be a better approach for those who want to significantly diverge from PHP proper. Already, it is possible to build something like this and have it transpile to PHP. In the future, perhaps it could even compile down into Zend opcodes that could be loaded directly into the PHP interpreter. Either way, it wouldn't change PHP itself, but it could provide the syntactic sugar and improved type-safety that folks are looking for. More importantly, it wouldn't split the community or internals. Cheers, Ben
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
