Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [DISCUSSION] Match expression

Hi Ilija, Ilija Tovilo wrote: I share others' concern that it is inconsistent with PHP's existing statements Can you elaborate on what exactly the concerns are? Well, I don't think we have any other expressions that are also statements with very slightly different syntax, and in this RFC

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Constructor Property Promotion

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:17 PM Dmitry Stogov wrote: > Hi Nikita, > > Personally, I don't see a big reason in introduction this syntax sugar. > It allows to make class declaration more compact but less readable. > > Also, this feature doesn't work well with inheritance. RFC doesn't provide > any

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Ensure correct magic methods' signatures when typed

> Le 14 avr. 2020 à 18:53, Nikita Popov a écrit : > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 6:07 PM Claude Pache > wrote: > > > > Le 14 avr. 2020 à 16:54, Nicolas Grekas > > a écrit : > > > > I'm just not sold on allowing "void" on

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [DISCUSSION] Match expression

Hi Andrea I realize there's a lot of noise in the mailing list right now, I'll keep this my only e-mail for today. > I share others' concern that it is inconsistent with PHP's > existing statements Can you elaborate on what exactly the concerns are? Note that even if we added block expressions

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][VOTE] Change default PDO error mode

On 13/04/2020 13:41, AllenJB wrote: Hi all, I have opened voting on the RFC to change the default PDO error mode: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pdo_default_errmode As no concerns were raised during the discussion period, the RFC is unchanged from that originally posted. Previous discussion

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Ensure correct magic methods' signatures when typed

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 6:07 PM Claude Pache wrote: > > > > Le 14 avr. 2020 à 16:54, Nicolas Grekas > a écrit : > > > > I'm just not sold on allowing "void" on __construct, because the very > concept of a return type on a constructor is ... void, and also because of > the code style choices

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Attributes v2

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020, at 10:42 AM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 5:24 PM Larry Garfield > wrote: > > 2. Regarding sub-annotations, can you still do classes as parameters even > > if not as an annotation marker? Eg: > > > > <> > > function foo() > > > > Or is that also a

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Ensure correct magic methods' signatures when typed

> Le 14 avr. 2020 à 16:54, Nicolas Grekas a > écrit : > > I'm just not sold on allowing "void" on __construct, because the very concept > of a return type on a constructor is ... void, and also because of the code > style choices this will open (and the CS "wars" I mentioned). > This

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Attributes v2

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 5:24 PM Larry Garfield wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020, at 6:00 AM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I have updated the RFC with much of the feedback received here, on > Twitter > > and Reddit. > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes_v2 > > > > The

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Attributes v2

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020, at 6:00 AM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I have updated the RFC with much of the feedback received here, on Twitter > and Reddit. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes_v2 > > The following changes were made: > >- Changed to support the same attribute

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Ensure correct magic methods' signatures when typed

> No, *nothing* is gonna be mandatory. > > As per the RFC: > > > This RFC proposes to introduce the following signatures checks when > magic methods are typed: > > These checks are only gonna be performed when you type your signatures and > *only when you type*. So, your example: `__call($name,

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Ensure correct magic methods' signatures when typed

Hi, just chiming in on a specific question/answer: On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 3:46 PM Gabriel Caruso wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 15:24, Nicolas Grekas > wrote: > > > > > > Foo::__isset(string $name): bool; > > > Foo::__unset(string $name): void; > > > > Same comment about LSP, but also about

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Attributes v2

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 3:04 PM Nicolas Grekas wrote: > Hi Benjamin, > > I have updated the RFC with much of the feedback received here, on Twitter >> and Reddit. >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes_v2 > > > Thanks for the update and for giving this a try! > > I'm wondering about nested

Re: [PHP-DEV] opcache.jit directive should be split up

> On Apr 14, 2020, at 08:53, Sebastian Bergmann wrote: > > PHP 8's JIT is currently mainly controlled through the opcache.jit > configuration directive [1]. > > The value for opcache.jit is currently a sequence of four digits, "5021" for > instance. This would activate JIT optimizations based

Re: [PHP-DEV] opcache.jit directive should be split up

Am 14.04.2020 um 15:53 schrieb Sebastian Bergmann: The value for opcache.jit is currently a sequence of four digits, "5021" for instance. This would activate JIT optimizations based on static type inference and inner procedure analyses (Optimization Level), JIT optimization of all functions on

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Attributes v2

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 2:56 PM Iván Arias wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I have updated the RFC with much of the feedback received here, on > Twitter > and Reddit. > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes_v2 > > > Hi Benjamin, > > Thanks a lot for you effort, same for Martin. I really

[PHP-DEV] opcache.jit directive should be split up

PHP 8's JIT is currently mainly controlled through the opcache.jit configuration directive [1]. The value for opcache.jit is currently a sequence of four digits, "5021" for instance. This would activate JIT optimizations based on static type inference and inner procedure analyses

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Ensure correct magic methods' signatures when typed

On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 15:24, Nicolas Grekas wrote: > Hello Gabriel, > > >>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/magic-methods-signature >> >> RFC and implementation have been updated. >> > > There are a few things I don't understand from the RFC, let me list from > the examples. > > > This RFC proposes to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Ensure correct magic methods' signatures when typed

Hello Gabriel, >>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/magic-methods-signature > > RFC and implementation have been updated. > There are a few things I don't understand from the RFC, let me list from the examples. > This RFC proposes to introduce the following signatures checks when magic methods are

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Ensure correct magic methods' signatures when typed

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 23:29, Gabriel Caruso wrote: > On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 22:40, Gabriel Caruso > wrote: > >> On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 12:55, Claude Pache wrote: >> >>> >>> Le 5 avr. 2020 à 16:01, Gabriel Caruso a >>> écrit : >>> >>> Hello, internals. >>> >>> Hereby you can find the RFC

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Attributes v2

Hi Benjamin, I have updated the RFC with much of the feedback received here, on Twitter > and Reddit. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes_v2 Thanks for the update and for giving this a try! I'm wondering about nested annotations: as you know, they're quite common in apps that use

[PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Constructor Property Promotion

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 2:30 PM Nikita Popov wrote: > Hi internals, > > I would like to submit the following RFC for your consideration: > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/constructor_promotion > > This is based on one off the suggestions made in > https://externals.io/message/109220, and some existing

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Attributes v2

> Hi everyone, > > I have updated the RFC with much of the feedback received here, on Twitter and Reddit. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes_v2 Hi Benjamin, Thanks a lot for you effort, same for Martin. I really hope to see this in PHP8. I have a simple question. From the RFC: >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Stricter type-checks for arithmetic/bitwise operators

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 3:11 PM Rowan Tommins wrote: > Hi Nikita, > > On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 at 09:14, Nikita Popov wrote: > > > I would like to propose making the use of arithmetic/bitwise operators on > > arrays, resources and (non-overloaded) objects a TypeError exception: > > > >

[PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Attributes v2

Hi everyone, I have updated the RFC with much of the feedback received here, on Twitter and Reddit. https://wiki.php.net/rfc/attributes_v2 The following changes were made: - Changed to support the same attribute multiple times on the same declaration - Added support for attributes on

[PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Allow trailing comma in parameter lists

Hi internals, I've opened voting on https://wiki.php.net/rfc/trailing_comma_in_parameter_list. Voting will close on 2020-04-28. Regards, Nikita

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][VOTE] Change default PDO error mode

Hi Chris, Apologies but I assumed your lack of further response or comment meant that my response had cleared up the issues you had with the suggested change. I particularly expected a response in this case since I had questions about (my understanding of) your response - specifically where

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][VOTE] Change default PDO error mode

Am 14.04.2020 um 03:10 schrieb Derick Rethans : > On Mon, 13 Apr 2020, Christian Schneider wrote: > >> Am 13.04.2020 um 14:41 schrieb AllenJB : >>> As no concerns were raised during the discussion period, the RFC is >>> unchanged from that originally posted. >>> >>> Previous discussion threads:

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Compact Object Property Assignment

Voting is over and the RFC has been declined. Thank you for your participation. Hope to see some progress on the Constructor Argument Promotion and Named Parameters projects soon instead :-) Best, Jakob On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 1:49 PM Jakob Givoni wrote: > > Heads up! > > I've moved the RFC