> De : Leigh [mailto:lei...@gmail.com]
>
> Can we keep a 0) of "reserve names for future use in-case of RFC
> failure" option.

Reserving names is only needed as long as we keep keywords sharing the same 
naming space as classes. This is a mistake from the past and, as long as we 
keep it, each new keyword is a pain. Reserving keywords in advance can only 
lead to reserving too few or too much. So, IMO, deprecating bare class names as 
hint is first. Then, we can reserve a limited set of keywords.

> How do you propose weak typing works with these? Does it only allow
> one of the union of types through (thus making it strict), or does it
> try and coerce to one if it can? Which one does it pick?

That's exactly the problem we need to solve before going the union type road. A 
limited set can be implemented now as new zpp types, but none that requires 
questionable conversion (while useful, we are not ready for 'int|float', for 
example).

Regards

François



--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to