Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Scalar Pseudo-type

From: Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 08:04:41 +0000
Subject: Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Scalar Pseudo-type
References: 1 2 3 4 5  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-101432@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
wrote in message news:4b55eed1-8656-ff70-e4e9-ad5e40213405@rhsoft.net...
Am 29.12.2017 um 00:21 schrieb Larry Garfield:
Correct. Union types I've always seen presented as offering both union and intersection. There are cases where union is great, and where it's kinda silly. There are cases where intersect is great, and where it's kinda silly. Most of the anti- arguments I've seen for "union types" have fixated on "int && string is meaningless, and Foo || Bar is bad design, so union types are bad!" Entirely ignoring the flip side, which is int || string (valid use cases) and Foo && Bar (many many valid use cases)
well, that explains why the same person which hase a usecase for a "scalar" pseudo-type donw-votes https://wiki.php.net/rfc/union_types but it makes his vote not logical at all frankly the only valid reasons to down-vote something should be technical ones which matters for the PHP core itself and not "i don't understand a feature hence nobody should have it"
You are missing the point. If an RFC is so badly written that someone does not understand it, or understand what benefits it is supposed to provide, then there is no point in up-voting it. You may contrive a use case where it provides a small benefit, but if that use case is so limited or so obscure that it does not apply to a significant number of developers then that RFC should be voted down simply because it does not provide any significant benefits. -- Tony Marston

« previous php.internals (#101432) next »