Re: [VOTE] Scalar Type Hints

Hi, On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be> wrote: > > And that is exactly why this RFC is great, since it lets the > strict-proponents have their strict types in their files, but those > preferring weak ones can remain in the default weak mode, never see an ugly > declare(), and still call strict code in weak mode. > > That is why I don't quite understand the "no" votes coming from weak-hints > proponents. Unless of course you would prefer to pass weak-only v0.1 and > then shoot down any attempt at strict hints. That strikes me as quite > selfish though, given the strict-proponents isn't such a tiny group of > people. > > And then there are the people sitting somewhere in between the black and > white camps. Those that would like to use strict sometimes for some critical > code paths, and for them the proposed solution is quite good as well. > I am in the "between black and white" camp and this RFC doesn't give me what I want, nor did the 0.1 version of it. I would vote 'no' on both if I had voting privileges. Please, all, stop speculating and just let the votes count. Cheers, Andrey.