Re: [RFC] Safe Casting Functions

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andrey Andreev [mailto:narf@devilix.net] >> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 1:15 AM >> To: Zeev Suraski >> Cc: Andrea Faulds; Stas Malyshev; Dmitry Stogov; PHP Internals >> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Safe Casting Functions >> >> > While it doesn't explicitly say so, it's clear that one of the goals >> > of the RFC is make it easier for a 'strict typing' RFC to be accepted >> > in the future. This is a clear indication this constitutes a >> > fundamental >> change to the core language. >> >> I'd argue that it has the exact opposite goal - to be able to say "use >> to_string(), to_int(), etc; we don't need strict type hinting". > > You may be right, I may have misinterpreted the rationale - but I think the > consequences are still the same. If this (in the eyes of the author) undoes > the need for a feature as fundamental as strict typing, how can it be just a > bunch of simple functions? Well, that might be the author's rationale, but you (probably) misinterpreted that exactly because it's not a *technical* limitation for strict type hints in the future. Personally, I only care about the technical side of it. As far as intentions and politics are concerned - if we don't play politicts for this one, we shouldn't play them for scalar hints as well. I've said this about every similar proposal so far: It is useful, so I don't mind having it, but I *also* want strict scalar type hints with the same syntax as for objects. So that's that - it's just not the same thing. Cheers, Andrey.