Am 30.12.2017 um 22:55 schrieb Michael Morris:
On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 5:37 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
Not being able to vote, many of us have no option to complain about the
way things are going. Currently there seems to be several styles of PHP
form the nice and simple untyped version I move
On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 5:37 AM, Lester Caine wrote:
>
> Not being able to vote, many of us have no option to complain about the
> way things are going. Currently there seems to be several styles of PHP
> form the nice and simple untyped version I moved to from very strictly
> typed hard compiled
Am 30.12.2017 um 18:15 schrieb Sebastian Bergmann:
Am 29.12.2017 um 18:30 schrieb li...@rhsoft.net:
"i don't see a benefit, i don't like it" are no valid reasons to do so
I strongly disagree. If a majority of people do not see the benefit of a
syntax change then the syntax should not be chan
Am 29.12.2017 um 16:37 schrieb Nikita Popov:
> Having an explicit number type also goes well with an explicit number cast.
> PHP internally has a notion of a number cast (which is the basis for
> arithmetic operations), but currently does not expose it. As such, number
> casts currently have to be
Am 29.12.2017 um 18:30 schrieb li...@rhsoft.net:
> "i don't see a benefit, i don't like it" are no valid reasons to do so
I strongly disagree. If a majority of people do not see the benefit of a
syntax change then the syntax should not be changed. A change to the
syntax of PHP has a ripple effect
On 29.12.2017 at 16:37, Nikita Popov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Fleshgrinder wrote:
>
>> What is the use case for `int|float`? I mean, if f is able to process a
>> `float` than f is able to process an `int` and since `int` is already
>> automatically changed to a `float`, well, yo
Am 30.12.2017 um 11:37 schrieb Lester Caine:
On 30/12/17 09:16, Tony Marston wrote:
You are missing the point. If an RFC is so badly written that someone
does not understand it, or understand what benefits it is supposed to
provide, then there is no point in up-voting it
if i don't undrstand
On 30/12/17 09:16, Tony Marston wrote:
>>> You are missing the point. If an RFC is so badly written that someone
>>> does not understand it, or understand what benefits it is supposed to
>>> provide, then there is no point in up-voting it
>>
>> if i don't undrstand it i don't vote at all - that's t
Am 30.12.2017 um 10:16 schrieb Tony Marston:
wrote in message news:f48976dd-589f-e88e-37ba-38096c3a3...@rhsoft.net...
You are missing the point. If an RFC is so badly written that someone
does not understand it, or understand what benefits it is supposed to
provide, then there is no point in
wrote in message news:f48976dd-589f-e88e-37ba-38096c3a3...@rhsoft.net...
Am 29.12.2017 um 09:04 schrieb Tony Marston:
wrote in message news:4b55eed1-8656-ff70-e4e9-ad5e40213...@rhsoft.net...
Am 29.12.2017 um 00:21 schrieb Larry Garfield:
Correct. Union types I've always seen presented as o
10 matches
Mail list logo
