On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 9:27 PM Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Just to make sure there is no misunderstanding I'd like to clarify that
> the proposed check of this RFC is not a runtime error. It's a compile
> time error, just like the check for incompatible method signatures
> during inheritance. In fact
On Tue, May 23, 2023, at 10:47 AM, Sara Golemon wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 11:37 AM Tim Düsterhus wrote:
>>
>> I'm now opening discussion for the RFC "Marking overridden methods
>> (#[\Override])":
>>
>
> I 100% get the intent behind this RFC, and as someone who's used this in
> multiple oth
Hi
On 5/22/23 23:32, David Gebler wrote:
whether there's an appetite out there in general to start adding all sorts
of new runtime checks, which I would argue means any new runtime check
warrants the utmost consideration of cost-benefit.
Just to make sure there is no misunderstanding I'd like
Voting has now ended with 21 votes for the "yes", and zero votes for
the "no".
Thanks everyone!
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 11:37 AM Tim Düsterhus wrote:
>
> I'm now opening discussion for the RFC "Marking overridden methods
> (#[\Override])":
>
I 100% get the intent behind this RFC, and as someone who's used this in
multiple other languages the benefit to defensive coding is obvious.
Thoughts
