Re: Soft-reserve "void" class name

On May 22, 2015 7:20 AM, "Stanislav Malyshev" <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi! > > > I'd like to add "void" to this list, so we have the option to introduce a > > void return type in PHP 7.x. I've seen some disagreement as to whether this > > I think this type makes no sense in PHP, but I don't object to having > note in the docs for people not to name their classes "void" (not that > there's any reason to do it anyway...). I strongly object to introducing > any changes in the code though - warnings, etc. The problem I see with any kind of additional soft reserved words is that it opens the door to actually reserve them in 7.x. And this is a way more bigger problem. If anything, I would rather extend or agree on a BC definitions RFC to avoid such possible breaks in x.y+1 releases. Cheers, Pierre