Re: Types on the right or on the left

>> If we used this syntax instead, which wouldn’t disrupt grep: >> >> public Foo function bar(); >> >> It’d be inconsistent with normal function declarations which would have to have Foo after >> function. > > I don't understand that inconsistency. > > public Foo function bar() { } > > looks perfectly sane to me. PHP's syntax was very heavily influenced by > C from day 1. In C you have: > > static int bar() { } > > In PHP the 'function' keyword indicates what follows is a function. > Putting something in between the function keyword and the name of the > function would confuse me. To me "function bar()" is inseparable and is > equivalent to "bar()" in C which makes the above examples consistent > with each other. Except static function() and static function foo() already have meaning, and if we allowed static return types (very possible) that would be ambiguous. This syntax is a no-go.