Hi Andrea,
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Faulds [mailto:a...@ajf.me]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 9:00 PM
> To: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Scalar Type Declaration Syntax Weirdness
>
> Hi,
>
> Anatol Belski wrote:
Hi Andrea,
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Faulds [mailto:a...@ajf.me]
> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 12:47 AM
> To: internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Scalar Type Declaration Syntax Weirdness
>
> Hi Anatol,
>
> Anatol Bel
Hi Anatol,
Anatol Belski wrote:
It may not be documented, but that doesn't put it outside the scope of BC.
People will unintentionally rely on bugs.
What is the reason to use \int if "class \int{}" is prohibited? A typo :) ?
It might be used deliberately since some IDEs (PHPStorm in
Hi!
> It may not be documented, but that doesn't put it outside the scope of
> BC. People will unintentionally rely on bugs.
People might, but we are under no obligation to keep bugs around for
these people.
--
Stas Malyshev
smalys...@gmail.com
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development
Hi,
Anatol Belski wrote:
that's my point as well. There is a clear documentation about type hints, usage of an
undocumented way is out of scope of BC. Using \int means there were a "class
int{}" which is prohibited. Of course it is a bug after all, which will be
addressed.
It may not
Hi Stas,
> -Original Message-
> From: Stanislav Malyshev [mailto:smalys...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 6:28 PM
> To: Andrea Faulds <a...@ajf.me>; internals@lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Scalar Type Declaration Syntax Weirdness
>
&g
On 11/24/2015 05:47 PM, Andrea Faulds wrote:
Can this be fixed for 7.0.0?
I sure hope so.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
On 24 November 2015 at 17:16, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> Hi Stas,
>
> Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>>>>>function a(\int $i) {}
Is it intentional that the \ in front of the "int" is allowed? IMHO,
this
confusing notation must not be
Hi!
> It can't wait for 7.0.1, because banning this would be a
> backwards-compatibility break with 7.0.0. We have to fix it in 7.0.0 or
> not fix it ever.
In theory, yes. In practice, if somebody starts using 7.0.0 and
immediately jumps to using \int, I don't feel too bad for breaking that
Hi Stas,
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
It can't wait for 7.0.1, because banning this would be a
backwards-compatibility break with 7.0.0. We have to fix it in 7.0.0 or
not fix it ever.
In theory, yes. In practice, if somebody starts using 7.0.0 and
immediately jumps to using \int, I don't
On Nov 24, 2015 12:28 PM, "Stanislav Malyshev" wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> > It can't wait for 7.0.1, because banning this would be a
> > backwards-compatibility break with 7.0.0. We have to fix it in 7.0.0 or
> > not fix it ever.
>
> In theory, yes. In practice, if somebody starts
Hi!
>> > function a(\int $i) {}
>>
>> Is it intentional that the \ in front of the "int" is allowed? IMHO,
>> this
>> confusing notation must not be allowed.
>
> This is weird and I'd consider it a bug. You can't do \array or
> \callable, and if I saw \int, I'd think it meant a
Hi Stas,
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
This is weird and I'd consider it a bug. You can't do \array or
\callable, and if I saw \int, I'd think it meant a class of that name
rather than a scalar type.
I would assume \int means class named "int", as opposed to "int" type.
That's
On 24/11/2015 18:50, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> There's no syntax change. We'd be adding another fatal error to
> zend_compile.c triggered by a flag on the token. No messing around with
> the parser.
>
> I understand your concern about the risk, but it's the kind of change
> that wouldn't break
14 matches
Mail list logo