Re: [RFC][Vote] Typed Properties

On 20/05/16 07:05, Joe Watkins wrote: > Morning internals, > > Since we have our answer on nullable types, typed properties can now go > to vote. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/typed-properties#vote > > Note that, support for nullability as RFC'd will be merged when the > implementation for nullable_types is merged into master. I have just realised exactly why I have a problem with most of this ... Domain! Used as an 'OtherThing' This is ALSO attributes, since an SQL domain defines all of the attributes that I need to handle in relation to variables. 'int' on it's own does very little since one still needs to add all the other checks, but adding 'types' as a properly formatted domain solves all the problems I'm looking at ... and leaves plenty of room for others to abuse the in their own way? http://www.firebirdsql.org/file/documentation/reference_manuals/fblangref25-en/html/fblangref25-ddl-domn.html Note such elements as [<array_dim>] to allow for arrays of a datatype although that still leaves the handling of mix arrays. Some of the conditions may seem irreverent, but if the domain is a set of keys for an array that logic then makes sense? I can even see the addition of a 'read only' flag to solve that problem while still constraining the initial setting of a domain. But this is simply user land code and does not need a small subset of elements of it added to the code base? -- 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