On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:30, Theodore Brown <theodorejb@outlook.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:24 PM Matthew Brown <matthewmatthew@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 12:55, Theodore Brown <theodorejb@outlook.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:06 AM Matthew Brown <
> matthewmatthew@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey everyone!
> > > >
> > > > The vote for adding noreturn is now open:
> > > >
> > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/noreturn_type
> > > >
> > > > Voting will run through April 13th
> > >
> > > Hi Matt and Ondrej,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your work on this RFC. I voted for never as the type name
> > > because it's more amenable to future use cases like compile-time
> > > exhaustiveness checks (example:
> > >
> https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/2/narrowing.html#the-never-type
> ).
> > >
> > > As a bonus never is more concise, avoids mashing two words together,
> > > and aligns with TypeScript, which I and many other PHP devs also use.
> >
> > Awesome! The conciseness argument for "never" is already mentioned in
> > the RFC, as is TypeScript's use of the term.
> >
> > Full disclosure (because neither of us is eligible to vote):
> > I slightly prefer "noreturn", and Ondrej strongly prefers "never".
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> I'm confused by this. If Ondrej strongly prefers never, why does the
> RFC say "we believe noreturn is the best name for this type"?
>
> It might be better to just remove this sentence, or else list your
> separate preferences.
>
> Thanks,
> Theodore
I've removed that sentence.
Opinions evolved — I wrote the RFC with the original language favouring
"noreturn", Ondrej edited it, adding more arguments for "never". Since we
published the RFC some in the community have validated his arguments, and I
think Ondrej's opinion has become stronger as a result (and mine has become
weaker). Whatever happens, I think we care much more that this passes than
what it's exactly called.
Best wishes,
Matt