"Marco Pivetta" wrote in message
news:CADyq6sJfPYgQvhQt=uvcbqkoojjoupcz1sufzwxc+55hl0p...@mail.gmail.com...
Tony, that sounds really like "real programmers use `dd -if -of`". Please
stop with that argument, as it really doesn't reflect reality.
That is not what I said. As a follower of the KISS principle I believe that
good programmers write simple code that anyone can understand, while
less-than-good programmers write complex code that only a select few can
understand.
The problem with adding all these new and shiny features to the language is
that it makes the language more complicated, especially when it comes to all
those edge cases which keep arising. Changes like this are making the
language more complicated by getting it to do in core what used to be done
in userland code. All that is happening is that it becomes more complicated
to update the language for genuine improvements which would be appreciated
by the masses instead of these over-complications which are only for the
benefit of the few who think programming should be restricted to those who
have Phd's.
I keep
enhancing my software with new (stricter) type checking, when available.
For example, I'm eager to replace current docblocks declaring `void`
methods with the upcoming hint (7.1), and every time I add hints and type
strictness I find new hidden bugs on an already well-tested code (with 100%
coverage and mutation testing). These bugs are legit, they are just waiting
to happen.
That just proves that your unit testing did not in fact have 100% coverage.
If a potential bug hasn't been encountered by a real user then it doesn't
actually cause a problem, and if it doesn't cause a problem then why does it
need a solution? Even Microsoft, the largest software company in the world,
does not attempt to fix every possible bug only those bugs which cause
problems.
Additionally, I would also love to get rid of docblocks for type-systems:
they are unreliable, hard to reflect and enforce nothing, which allows lazy
and sloppy programmers to just circumvent specifications as it best pleases
their mood, rather than the requirements.
Yes, I'm a real programmer too, and no, I don't use cosmic rays to write
code to my computer's hard drive, give it a rest.
On Apr 15, 2016 08:09, "Tony Marston" <tonymars...@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Levi Morrison" wrote in message
news:cafmt4nr4gmnbbsofydf5slotaeo1rzzipdgdv8v6y+z-6pv...@mail.gmail.com...
There are too many people out there who are trying to make the language
more complicated than it need be just to prove how clever they are.
I can assure you I am not proposing these RFCs to show how clever I am.
If millions of programmers have written millions of lines of code to
write
effective programs WITHOUT the use of type hinting/enforcement, then how
come there are some people out there who keep saying that PHP is a bad
language because it does not have type checking? Those who cannot write
effective software without these "clever" additions to the language are
doing nothing but announcing to the world that they are not clever enough
to write effective software using their own limited abilities.
--
Tony Marston
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
Tony Marston
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
