Re: Re: [RFC][VOTE] Nullable Types

On 10/05/16 21:26, Levi Morrison wrote: > It can affect the results. > > function foo(?Foo $param) {} > > If any code out there is calling foo with null then that code will now > break if you remove the question mark. Cart before Horse comes to mind ... If the function is going to fail if you pass in a null ... you check for the null before calling it. OK the '?' is a flag that you need to do that, but you really need proper documentation as to just what Foo expects. If I've handled the null case situation, the ? is redundant? I'm still failing to see an overall picture of what people are trying to achieve. Adding errors means that those errors need to be handled. If the function gets a 'null' then there is a reason, and either the function should not have been called ... workflow failed ... or the function should simply handle the 'null' case. If the '?' throws an error the workflow is broken after the event where a user code warning would be more helpful. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk