Re: Scalar Type Hints v0.4

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote: > On 02/17/2015 04:35 PM, Nikita Popov wrote: > > I don't buy into Rasmus arguments about internal functions. They concern > > one particular edge case (int->float coercion) and I doubt they have much > > relevance if applied to codebases with pervasive use of typehints (where > > you can be reasonably sure of the types of your variables). Even if, for > > the sake of argument, we acknowledge the concern as valid we should be > > discussing that particular case (int->float coercion) rather than > dropping > > the strict typing for internal functions altogether. > > int->float is actually secondary to "123"->int. And while they may be > edge-cases there are enough of them that we would be pushing people > towards casting by default which should be a last-resort thing, not the > first thing you do. > The inability to implicitly cast "123" to int is pretty much the KEY distinction between weak and strict scalar typehints (those pesky value-dependent type checks). If the strict typing mode doesn't offer this, what's the point at all? This is exactly what I fear will happen with an arginfo based approach. If even fundamental aspects like the "123" vs 123 (or true vs 1) distinction are suppressed for internal functions, this isn't a strict typing mode, it's just a weak typing mode with slightly different rules. Nikita