Hi Chris, I meant scalar type hinting, nullable type hinting, may be even mixed type hinting... But, lets go by small steps to get all this finally accepted.
Thanks. Dmitry. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Chris Wright <c...@daverandom.com> wrote: > Dmitry > > On 16 October 2014 08:44, Dmitry Stogov <dmi...@zend.com> wrote: > > The RFC is very consistent. > > It proposes only a part of the desired type-hinting features, but this > part > > is not questionable for me. > > May I enquire what it misses out according to your ideal desired > feature set? Just so that I/everyone is clear on what the limitations > and potential areas for future expansion are, and to ensure nothing > has been missed that could be included in this change without being > too contentious. > > Apart from distinct features (e.g. scalar types) I'm not sure what is > missing from the proposal, so I'd like to know what I'm missing. > > Also, just for the record, I am +1 on the RFC as it currently stands. > > Thanks, Chris >
