I could setup a repo on Github for this if anyone thinks that would be helpful?
--Kris On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:05 PM, John Crenshaw <johncrens...@priacta.com>wrote: > Yeah, I proposed this the other day. We need to go through the hundreds of > historical emails on the subject and consolidate all the information into a > central document outlining all the information that has been developed over > the years. Lots of benefits to this. If multiple people want to participate > in this process we can probably partition it by date ranges. > > John Crenshaw > Priacta, Inc. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Anthony Ferrara [mailto:ircmax...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 3:15 PM > To: Kris Craig > Cc: internals@lists.php.net; Arvids Godjuks; Michael Morris; Lazare > Inepologlou > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Scalar type hinting > > Can I make a suggestion? Instead of an rfc, can we collate the existing > discussion into an easier to digest format (historical as well). Summarize > the conversations and existing rfcs with the discussion around them > (including the pros/cons and problems). That way we have a point of > reference and comparison with which to base the rfc on, and a way to judge > and rate the rfc... > > Anthony > On Feb 28, 2012 3:09 PM, "Kris Craig" <kris.cr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > @Michael Would you be willing to delay that? Rather than create a > > bunch of new RFC's, I was thinking it might be better if all > > interested parties came together on some other communication medium > > and worked on a single, collaborative RFC instead. > > > > --Kris > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Michael Morris > > <dmgx.mich...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Now I'm going to go work up a detailed RFC for what I posted earlier > > > with some additional clarification as to when errors should and > > > shouldn't be thrown. > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM, John Crenshaw > > > <johncrens...@priacta.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > OK everyone, it seems that some people have forgotten or missed > > > > the > > > original agreement that this thread started with. There is a > > communication > > > disconnect ("strict typing" means horribly different things to > > > different people right now). Please read through and understand the > > > following terminology before continuing to post on this thread. > > > We've agreed to the following terms: > > > > > > > > - "Strict Typing" means the super strict old C style typing *with > > > > no > > > implicit conversions*. (If you really think this is what you want, > > > you > > are > > > probably mistaken. Look through prior discussions on this topic. > > > This > > fails > > > for numerous reasons, including the fact that almost every input to > > > PHP > > is > > > a string.) > > > > - "Weak Typing" means types in the same sense that the PHP > > documentation > > > uses types (for example, the docs indicate substr(string, integer), > > > and substr(12345, "2") == "345".) (If you think you want "strict > > > typing", > > this > > > is probably what you mean.) > > > > - "No Scalar Typing" should be used to indicate the current system > > > (where there is no provision for hinting at scalar types.) > > > > > > > > In addition, if someone potentially new expresses support for > > > > "Strict > > > Typing", please assume that they really mean weak typing unless > > > proven otherwise (this is by far the more likely intent.) Don't get > > > mean, > > politely > > > clarify terminology so that everyone can be on the same page. If > > > someone still insists that they want "Strict Typing" (as defined > > > above), point > > them > > > to the prior discussions on the topic which explain exactly what the > > > problems with this are. > > > > > > > > John Crenshaw > > > > Priacta, Inc. > > > > > > -- > > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, > > > visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > > > >
