Re: Re: [RFC] Nullable intersection types

> On 11/08/2021 13:09, Nicolas Grekas wrote: > > > > On 10/08/2021 13:39, Nicolas Grekas wrote: > > > I will wait if I don't have the choice, but as many others > > reported, the > > > experience with 7.0 missing nullability was a pain. > > > > Apologies if you already did and I've forgotten, but could you please > > expand on what "pain" you are referring to here? > > > > > > I personally did not experience that pain because I just skipped 7.0, > > since it wouldn't allow expressing the nullable return types I had to > > express in the APIs I maintain. > > > Sorry, I'm still confused what the "pain" is *other than* feeling > obliged to wait until 7.1. > Maybe others that read this can share their experience on the topic? > The larger issue is that when used as a type on arguments, adding the > > nullability flag isn't possible without a BC breaking change. > > > I can't imagine many people will force a parameter to be non-nullable > just to use the shiny new syntax, then re-allow nulls in a subsequent > version. More likely, they will leave that parameter un-checked until > the full type can be specified. > > There is also a lot of code out there which is either: > > * in stand-alone applications, so backwards compatibility has no meaning > * in private libraries with a handful of uses, so bringing uses in line > is trivial > * in public libraries, but marked "private" or "final", or documented as > "internal use only", and therefore not subject to compatibility guarantees > > > > But until it's too late, I'm willing to engage in this topic because I > > think the current state is far from ideal for 8.1. > > > There are always more features we could add, and there will always be a > judgement call of what versions of PHP a code base should support. > > If it was generally agreed that there was only one right way to > implement nullable intersections, and it was a trivial change, then I'd > support it as a "quick win"; but that doesn't seem to be the case. > It is a trivial change from a technical pov, that's why I submit it for 8.1. There's zero risk. Thanks for your feedback btw! Nicolas