Re: [RFC] ReflectionParameter::hasTypehint() / getTypehintText()
| From: | Sara Golemon | Date: | Thu, 29 May 2014 22:01:12 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] ReflectionParameter::hasTypehint() / getTypehintText() | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-74646@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Levi Morrison <morrison.levi@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Sara Golemon <pollita@php.net> wrote:
>> Pretty straight-forward. Makes it easier to recreate a function
>> signature from PHP (Mocking)
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reflectionparameter.typehint
>
> I'm hoping to improve the way types are handled in reflection but I've
> been waiting until the return types and nullable types RFCs have been
> voted on as that will most likely impact my decisions. I'd like to
> introduce getType and hasType functions that holds various bits of
> information such as isArray(), isCallable() and could also contain the
> text representation of the type. What are your thoughts on that?
>
As in something like this?
$rf = new ReflectionFunction('foo');
list($rp) = $rf->getParameters();
$hint = $rp->getType(); // returns ReflectionTypeHint
if ($hint->isArray()) { ... }
I thought about that (and would like to see it), which is why I
specifically went for the name getTypehintText(), which leaves the
"get me an object version" (i.e. getTypehint()) left available. See
also: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/reflectionparameter.typehint#on_the_naming
If you think it's a bit too busy to have getTypehint(): object, and
getTypehintText(): string, I can hold off on this RFC for awhile.
There's certainly no rush.
Or did you mean something else?
-Sara