Re: RFC: Return Types Update
| From: | Chris Wright | Date: | Thu, 16 Oct 2014 09:35:21 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: RFC: Return Types Update | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-78108@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Dmitry
On 16 October 2014 08:44, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
> The RFC is very consistent.
> It proposes only a part of the desired type-hinting features, but this part
> is not questionable for me.
May I enquire what it misses out according to your ideal desired
feature set? Just so that I/everyone is clear on what the limitations
and potential areas for future expansion are, and to ensure nothing
has been missed that could be included in this change without being
too contentious.
Apart from distinct features (e.g. scalar types) I'm not sure what is
missing from the proposal, so I'd like to know what I'm missing.
Also, just for the record, I am +1 on the RFC as it currently stands.
Thanks, Chris