Ok, fine. We get it. You don't think this can be done. Duly noted. Now that you've voiced your opposition, can we please dedicate this topic to discussing how this can be done? If you think we're wasting our time, then ok; it's our time to waste. I'd be happy to take you up on your challenge to try to implement this, but first we have to brainstorm what exactly we'll be doing. And that'll be much easier if we don't have to keep sifting through duplicate posts about why this is a bad idea. Let's just set that aside for now so we can brainstorm.
On that note, I would like to direct everyone's attention to my last post where I suggested a new "strong" concept. --Kris On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Richard Lynch <c...@l-i-e.com> wrote: > On Mon, February 27, 2012 11:38 am, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > > Discussed to death. Yet only one time before (discussing a specific > > patch)... > > Did you go back to the old, old, old PHP list (and was it PHP-dev back > then?), before it split into php-general and php-internals and php-*, > back when there weren't enough users to warrant more than two lists? > > You may find more fruitful results there, I think. > > Or not. > > Did you check the wiki and RFCs that came out of those discussions? > > Those are the places where the really serious proposals with patches > developed after the mailing list wrangling. > > They all failed, in the end, but those are the ones that actually got > taken seriously, because they had enough specificity to discuss for or > against for technical merit. > > The idea has always always had some technical merit. The > implementation, however, has always failed. > > The very strict typing usually failed quickly. > > The not so strict typing either failed after a lot of effort, and edge > cases kept cropping up, or ended up being so weak as to not provide > any additional value over the original dynamic typing. > > The patches are out there. The conclusions and technical issues are > out there. They may be lost in the sea of flame-wars, but they do > exist. > > > If you don't like this feature, and you can explain from a TECHNICAL > > perspective why, please do so! If you don't like the feature, and are > > going to lean on "It's not Java", or "We've discussed this to death > > already", please don't... > > Stas has already stated that you can't do what you want and have it > mean anything without changing the very nature of PHP. > > I said the same, poorly, and invite you to TRY with a patch instead of > discussing it endlessly here. > > > And to be fair: "and you can provide new arguments to the discussion" > > has already happened quite a bit (dating back the past 5 years), but > > those arguments were ignored or overruled for political reasons. > > Write the proof of concept patch, please. > > Then we can discuss the technical merits or prove why it won't work. > > Otherwise, it really is an endless discussion of a dead horse. > > -- > brain cancer update: > http://richardlynch.blogspot.com/search/label/brain%20tumor > Donate: > > https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=FS9NLTNEEKWBE > > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
