On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohg...@ohgaki.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think this is important, but not many people realize the importance.
> Therefore I created this as a new thread at the last minutes of vote.
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Dennis Birkholz <den...@birkholz.biz>
> wrote:
>
>> Am 16.03.2015 um 06:28 schrieb Xinchen Hui:
>> > lib.php
>> > <?php
>> > declare(strict_types = 1);
>> > function add(int $a, int $b) {
>> > }
>> >
>> > <?php
>> > add($_GET['a'], $_GET['b']);
>> >
>> > that means, I need to add a lots of (int) while I try to call a
>> > function in a library which is not written by myself.
>>
>> that is not right and has been discussed a thousand times over.
>> The declare changes the rules only for function calls in the file it is
>> declared in.
>>
>> so:
>> lib.php:
>> <?php
>> declare(strict_types = 1);
>> function foo(int $a) {
>> // no function call here
>> }
>> ?>
>> The declare here does just nothing.
>>
>> <?php
>> require "lib.php";
>> foo("123"); // will work
>> ?>
>>
>> <?php
>> declare(strict_types = 1);
>> require "lib.php";
>> foo("123"); // will give an error
>> ?>
>>
>>
> If this kind of behavior is allowed, why "strict mode" is called strict?
> It's not
> strict at all if mode could be overridden.
>
> "strict_mode" is just controlling errors, then it should be named as error
> controlling directive and raise E_WARNING/E_TYPE or whatever.
>
> Even if what its controlling is error that can be overridden by caller, yet
> calling it "strict_types" is not correct. Proper name would be something
> like "raise_type_error".
>
> Let's see how it looks if "strict_types" is renamed to "raise_type_error"
>
> <?php
> declare(raise_type_error = 1);
> function foo(int $a) {
> // no function call here
> }
> ?>
> The declare here does just nothing.
>
> <?php
> require "lib.php";
> foo("123"); // will work
> ?>
>
> <?php
> declare(raise_type_error = 1);
> require "lib.php";
> foo("123"); // will give an error
> ?>
>
> Is everyone feel OK with this??
>
> There are other things I would like to mention, but this would be enough
> to change decision hopefully.
>
> Regards,
>
> P.S. If we are going to introduce strict types for basic types, what we
> really need is type affinity for inputs. e.g. $_GET/$_POST/$_COOKIE.
> https://www.sqlite.org/datatype3.html
>
> --
> Yasuo Ohgaki
> yohg...@ohgaki.net
Hello,
this would make more sense than "strict types", which is a bad name
anyways (as I already mentioned in some other email) - because the
concept of non-week typing is usually called "strongly typed" in any
other language I can think of. Does PHP have to be a special
snowflake?
Regards
Pavel Kouril
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
