Hello,
there is some trace of absolutism in every statements:
first;;; saying php is a highly dynamic is not not fact but a sorry ***
excuse; ain't part of engineering ; admitting php5 is a load of idiotic
mistakes yes; I like people going for reality not ideology; with facts you
can work with ideology; an infinite debate of nonsense with fanatics.
second;;; you can properly handling it without a preprocessor as people
trying hard to name it by going thru abusing
statements about static analysis; it's all about handling an exception
process properly; but it will require to break
compatibility as I mentioned previously.
Best.
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 10:03 AM Benjamin Morel <benjamin.mo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I think we are rapidly approaching the limit where to make the
> > language stricter, we need an official static analysis tool, like Hack
> has,
> > rather than trying to do everything at run-time.
>
>
> It might even be possible to build this into OpCache somehow, so that if
> > you pre-analyse your code, it will skip runtime checks that it can prove
> > will never fail (e.g. return type annotation on a function that always
> > returns literals).
>
>
>
> > The tricky part is that PHP is a highly dynamic language (...)
>
>
> Features like scalar type hints, return types, property type hints, and
> preloading (which makes the definition of a type-hinted class available at
> compile time), should definitely help towards skipping a lot of runtime
> checks!
>
>
> On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 at 11:37, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 at 09:57, Robert Hickman <robehick...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > For instance:
> > > >
> > > > function foo(): type nothrow {
> > > > throw new SomethingException;
> > > > }
> > >
> > > Would it be possible to analyse the call graph at compile time
> > > (bytecode generation) and then trigger a fatal error? It wouldn't be
> > > possible for variable functions/methods though. A separate static
> > > analyser could do the same thing.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Yes, I think we are rapidly approaching the limit where to make the
> > language stricter, we need an official static analysis tool, like Hack
> has,
> > rather than trying to do everything at run-time.
> >
> > It might even be possible to build this into OpCache somehow, so that if
> > you pre-analyse your code, it will skip runtime checks that it can prove
> > will never fail (e.g. return type annotation on a function that always
> > returns literals).
> >
> > The tricky part is that PHP is a highly dynamic language, so there's a
> lot
> > of cases where the analysis can only return "maybe". My understanding is
> > that this is what a lot of the work on Hack is doing: creating a language
> > which looks a lot like PHP, but doesn't have as many ambiguous cases
> which
> > can't be analysed statically.
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Rowan Collins
> > [IMSoP]
> >
>
