Results for project PHP master, build date 2017-05-22 19:24:08-07:00
commit: 293d990
previous commit:26a6d20
revision date: 2017-05-22 23:23:12+03:00
environment:Haswell-EP
cpu:Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz 2x18 cores,
stepping 2, LLC 45 MB
Hey internals!
I haven't written the RFC yet, but the implementation is already done. I
think that this is enough to start the discussion, since the concept of
UUIDs should be well known to most people.
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/2535
The best starting point, also for non-C people, is t
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
>
> I feel like this feature takes a pretty dangerous shortcut by simply
> removing a constraint check that we used to have - in favor of supporting a
> few rare cases, we removed a guarantee that interfaces and the
> implements-keyword has al
Hi Rasmus,
> This parameter type widening RFC, I didn't know about, but I have a remark.
>
> The feature, as implemented, will allow accidental omission of type-hints,
> will it not?
>
Yes, correct.
> Previously, the implements keyword guaranteed a correctly type-hinted
> implementation - it's
On 5/23/2017 9:51 PM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> One of the primary motivations behind this RFC is to allow the addition of
> typehints (for example in library code) without introducing a backwards
> compatibility break for any code implementing or extending your
> interface/class. Requiring an explicit
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> This parameter type widening RFC, I didn't know about, but I have a remark.
>
> The feature, as implemented, will allow accidental omission of type-hints,
> will it not?
>
> Previously, the implements keyword guaranteed a correctly type-hin
On 5/23/2017 9:25 PM, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> This parameter type widening RFC, I didn't know about, but I have a remark.
>
> The feature, as implemented, will allow accidental omission of type-hints,
> will it not?
>
> Previously, the implements keyword guaranteed a correctly type-hinted
> imple
This parameter type widening RFC, I didn't know about, but I have a remark.
The feature, as implemented, will allow accidental omission of type-hints,
will it not?
Previously, the implements keyword guaranteed a correctly type-hinted
implementation - it's now possible to (purposefully, obviously,
