Re: [RFC] Deprecate implicitly nullable parameter type

On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:21 AM tag Knife <fenniclog@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 09:51, Gina P. Banyard <internals@gpb.moe> wrote: > > > Hello internals, > > > > Máté Kocsis and myself would like to propose deprecating implicitly > > nullable parameter types. > > > > The RFC is available on the wiki at the following address: > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-implicitly-nullable-types > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Gina P. Banyard > > > > -- > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > Also just did a quick test, and i don't believe this would be possible. It > would remove functionality from the language widely used. > As you are mistaking iint $var = null params as > "nullable". Which they > are not, they are "optional default" parameters. The equals > can be succeeded by any value, to set the parameter to such variable where > the parameter is not passed. int ?$arg is not provided as > an alternative, the directive int ?$arg simple allows the > parameters to > be passed as null, it is still required to pass through the > parameter. > > To clarify > > T ?$var = Requires the parameter to be passed to the function, > null > value allowed > T $var = null = Does not require the parameter to be passed to > the > function, is set to null if not. > > https://3v4l.org/IWsqK Your example contains int2 as type with a default value of null. This works because it implicitly marks the class int2 as nullable. If you were to set this default value to 1 via int2 $int2 = 1 it breaks with "Fatal error: Cannot use int as default value for parameter $int2 of type int2" Anyhow, = null implicitly makes the parameter nullable even if the type doesn't specify it's nullable. The argument is that if the type isn't nullable, then the default value may not be null either.