> Am 15.03.2015 um 18:48 schrieb Anthony Ferrara <ircmax...@gmail.com>:
>
> Andrea's RFC had the following wording:
>
>> The only exception to this is the handling of NULL: in order to be
>> consistent with our existing type hints for classes, callables and arrays,
>> NULL is not accepted by default, unless the parameter is explicitly given a
>> default value of NULL. This would work well with the draft Declaring
>> Nullable Types RFC.
>
> This proposal has a different behavior here. It explicitly allows
> nulls for types:
>
> function foo(int $abc) { var_dump($abc); }
>
> Unlike my proposal and any of Andrea's, calling foo(null) will be
> int(0) instead of an error.
>
> This is an important distinction as it basically undermines any
> attempt at a nullable RFC, since it makes primitives implicitly
> nullable.
>
> Anthony.
Anthony,
I think you've got something wrong there. It won't undermine an attempt at a
nullable RFC.
In the weak scalar typing world, nullables won't change what we accept, but
what we receive.
function (int|null $abc) { var_dump($abc); }
(or ?int or whatever syntax we will use)
would allow null to *not* be casted here.
Means foo(null) will lead to $abc being null and not int(0) with that signature.
Bob
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
