> On Tue, 5 Oct 2021 at 23:58, Alexandru Pătrănescu
> wrote:
>
> > But there is one more small elephant in the RFC that I believe should be
> > discussed.
> > null|false type will not be a nullable named type but it will be an union
> > between two named types.
> >
> > It's not totally
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 04:33, Levi Morrison
wrote:
> I don't see the word `void` in the RFC. I think there ought to be
> something said about how naked `null` is different or not different
> than `void`.
Added a section which attempts to explain the difference between both.
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021
On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 6:07 PM G. P. B. wrote:
> Hello internals,
>
> I'm proposing a new RFC to make 'null' usable as a standalone type.
>
> RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null-standalone-type
> GitHub PR: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/7546
>
> Best regards,
>
> George P. Banyard
>
Hey
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:45 PM Nikita Popov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 4:08 PM Côme Chilliet wrote:
>
> > Le lundi 4 octobre 2021, 10:09:12 CEST Nikita Popov a écrit :
> > > If we make this change, I would however suggest to also support "false"
> > as
> > > a standalone type. I think this
> On Oct 2, 2021, at 11:06 AM, G. P. B. wrote:
>
> Hello internals,
>
> I'm proposing a new RFC to make 'null' usable as a standalone type.
>
> RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null-standalone-type
Regarding the RFC's proposed disallowing of `?null`, is that really needed?
Obviously it doesn't
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 4:08 PM Côme Chilliet wrote:
>
> Why would function a(): null|false {} be legal but function b(): null|0
> would not?
>
> This is inconsistent to me. And adding null, then false, then true for the
> sake of completeness feels like avoiding to treat the static value as type
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 4:08 PM Côme Chilliet wrote:
> Le lundi 4 octobre 2021, 10:09:12 CEST Nikita Popov a écrit :
> > If we make this change, I would however suggest to also support "false"
> as
> > a standalone type. I think this change primarily has benefits from a
> > typesystem
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 8:08 AM Côme Chilliet wrote:
>
> Le lundi 4 octobre 2021, 10:09:12 CEST Nikita Popov a écrit :
> > If we make this change, I would however suggest to also support "false" as
> > a standalone type. I think this change primarily has benefits from a
> > typesystem completeness
Le lundi 4 octobre 2021, 10:09:12 CEST Nikita Popov a écrit :
> If we make this change, I would however suggest to also support "false" as
> a standalone type. I think this change primarily has benefits from a
> typesystem completeness perspective rather than a strong practical need.
> From that
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 5:33 AM Levi Morrison via internals <
internals@lists.php.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 9:07 AM G. P. B. wrote:
> >
> > Hello internals,
> >
> > I'm proposing a new RFC to make 'null' usable as a standalone type.
> >
> > RFC:
On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 9:07 AM G. P. B. wrote:
>
> Hello internals,
>
> I'm proposing a new RFC to make 'null' usable as a standalone type.
>
> RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null-standalone-type
> GitHub PR: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/7546
>
> Best regards,
>
> George P. Banyard
I don't
Hello internals,
I'm proposing a new RFC to make 'null' usable as a standalone type.
RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null-standalone-type
GitHub PR: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/7546
Best regards,
George P. Banyard
12 matches
Mail list logo
