Howdy Rob, >> I appreciate your feedback, and I think it’s valid. I try to compare my >> expectations to what is possible in typescript. > > I feel like Typescript is the wrong model to follow. The type system in > Typescript is Turing Complete > (https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/issues/14833) and php barely has a > type system. It doesn’t even have consistent type checking, for that matter > (properties are checked differently than arguments which are checked > differently than constructor arguments — and the fact they agree with each > other at all, is interesting, because they don’t arrive at the same > conclusions in the same way. I’ve been dealing with subtle bugs here for > weeks on an unannounced RFC implementation) and this is why generics is a can > of worms: implementing it would essentially force a rewrite of the type > system into a proper type system. > > In my honest opinion, before we can even have this type of conversation, we > need to have an RFC about the syntax (there may already be one, I haven’t > checked — and internet is spotty where I currently am). The pattern matching > RFC was proposed as though it would be written one way, people have thrown > out ideas of different syntax, but I don’t think there is an “official” > syntax. A good starting point may be to simply propose an RFC about syntax so > future RFCs can be consistent. > > — Rob
I actually did not know it was turning complete, very interesting! While it is easy for anyone to say, ‘we're not even close to typescript,’ that’s precisely what brings me to the table. I would be happy with us just voting on syntax. It seems like past RFC’s only ever got hung up on generics (wrongfully?). I want to work on implementing generics, too, after this. I feel this is probably a good stepping stone. A vote would solidify the following: interface iArrayA ['a' => string ] interface iArrayB extends iArrayA ['b' => string, 'c' => ?string, ‘d’ => SomeClass, ‘e’=> iArrayA, ‘f’ => mixed ] $array = (iArrayA &| iArrayB) [ ‘a’ => ‘hello’ ]; That would allow us to move into an implementation discussion, which is also absolutely needed. Best, Richard Miles
