On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 at 22:29, David Rodrigues wrote:
> It is very likely that the proposal will be accepted (it is already 33/10),
>
I'm definitely not counting my chickens.
> Is there any chance of discussing terms, even if the "never" indication is
> winning at the moment? Or did I miss this
Just to spice up the discussion a bit, I will try to give my opinion on
this RFC...
It is very likely that the proposal will be accepted (it is already 33/10),
but I still find the terms "noreturn" or "never" unclear. "noreturn" are
two words together, and I am not particularly a fan of this type
On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 at 12:30, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
>
> But adding a new keyword "noreturn" would not be necessary, it could just
> be an Attribute as i said in my first e-mail explaining my no-vote:
>
> #[NoReturn] // sets a function flag modifying the void behavior
> public function foo():
On 03.04.21 21:26, Peter Bowyer wrote:
This and Levi's email make compelling arguments and I would like to see
this adopted. I have changed my vote to "No".
Wasn't Levi arguing for the RFC? Introducing "never" as a bottom type is
what Levi was strongly arguing for, and that is what the RFC
On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 at 17:30, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
> The problem is that "void" is already not perfect, since the callside
> doesn't care about "return null" with no return type vs "return" + void
> return type.
>
> If we had "nothing" and "null" instead of "void", and we'd say like PHP
>
On 03.04.21 18:30, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
if (is_string($value) && is_int($value)) {
// inside here $value is_type == "never"
}
The naming "never" here makes no sense, because from a theoretical
perspective reasoning about the type of $value it is nothing and only the
block of code is
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 5:30 PM Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 3:14 AM Aaron Piotrowski wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Apr 1, 2021, at 2:03 PM, Levi Morrison via internals <
>> internals@lists.php.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > I do not care which name is chosen, but if we are going to have
On 03/04/2021 16:30, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
But I again get to the point of the problem with this RFC due to naming.
"never" is actually combining "nothing" type with "noreturn" flag, so for
me the most consistent way would have been "public noreturn function foo():
nothing"
I'm not sure how
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 3:14 AM Aaron Piotrowski wrote:
>
> > On Apr 1, 2021, at 2:03 PM, Levi Morrison via internals <
> internals@lists.php.net> wrote:
> >
> > I do not care which name is chosen, but if we are going to have this
> > sort of thing in the language, it ought to be a bottom type,
I am still not comfortable with the error message "Nothing was expected to
be returned" which is very confusing and I would change it to "was expected
to throw or exit" or "was expected to never return".
I went with "never" because it just reads better: "Function abc returns
never" instead of
> On Apr 1, 2021, at 2:03 PM, Levi Morrison via internals
> wrote:
>
> I do not care which name is chosen, but if we are going to have this
> sort of thing in the language, it ought to be a bottom type, not an
> attribute.
>
You make an excellent point Levi. I initially chose `noreturn`
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:59 AM Matthew Brown wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 04:56, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
>
> > This RFC is using the declaration of the return type, to specify that it
> > never returns. As such noreturn or never is a keyword a long the lines of
> > public or final, but it is
On 1. 4. 2021 19:24:35, Bruce Weirdan wrote:
> Since `throw` is an expression (since PHP 8.0,
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/throw_expression), it must have a type for its
> result,
> as any expression has a type. And it's result is exactly `noreturn` (or
> `never`, as this option seems to be
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:07 PM Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
>
> ```php
> if (!isset($user)) {
>throw new NotFoundException();
> }
> ```
>
Since `throw` is an expression (since PHP 8.0,
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/throw_expression), it must have a type for its
result,
as any expression has a type.
On 01.04.21 17:07, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
I don't know, you are arguing that you forgot a return, but you also did
not forget to add a never return type. You
could easily fix this by inlining the exception instead.
```php
if (!isset($user)) {
throw new NotFoundException();
}
```
Even when
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 3:56 PM Andreas Leathley wrote:
> On 01.04.21 10:56, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
> > This RFC is using the declaration of the return type, to specify that it
> > never returns. As such noreturn or never is a keyword a long the lines of
> > public or final, but it is not a
On 01.04.21 10:56, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
This RFC is using the declaration of the return type, to specify that it
never returns. As such noreturn or never is a keyword a long the lines of
public or final, but it is not a return type.
I don't think the argument for potential optimizations in
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 04:56, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
> This RFC is using the declaration of the return type, to specify that it
> never returns. As such noreturn or never is a keyword a long the lines of
> public or final, but it is not a return type.
>
> I don't think the argument for potential
Am 01.04.2021 um 10:56 schrieb Benjamin Eberlei:
I voted no, because i think this should at the maximum be an attribute.
This RFC is using the declaration of the return type, to specify that it
never returns. As such noreturn or never is a keyword a long the lines of
public or final, but it is
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:07 PM Matthew Brown
wrote:
> Hey everyone!
>
> The vote for adding noreturn is now open:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/noreturn_type
>
> Voting will run through April 13th
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Matt and Ondrej
>
I voted no, because i think this should at the maximum be
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:30, Theodore Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:24 PM Matthew Brown
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 12:55, Theodore Brown
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:06 AM Matthew Brown <
> matthewmatt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey everyone!
> >
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:24 PM Matthew Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 12:55, Theodore Brown wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:06 AM Matthew Brown
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey everyone!
> > >
> > > The vote for adding noreturn is now open:
> > >
> > >
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 14:41, Ilija Tovilo wrote:
>
> Hi internals
>
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 2:14 PM Andreas Hennings wrote:
> >
> > Also check my comment in the other thread:
> > If in the future we want a "bottom type" that also works for parameters
> > (generics or abstract methods), should
Hi internals
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 2:14 PM Andreas Hennings wrote:
>
> Also check my comment in the other thread:
> If in the future we want a "bottom type" that also works for parameters
> (generics or abstract methods), should we create a new keyword, or should
> we attempt to find a keyword
Also check my comment in the other thread:
If in the future we want a "bottom type" that also works for parameters
(generics or abstract methods), should we create a new keyword, or should
we attempt to find a keyword now that works for all cases?
Neither "never" nor "noreturn" seems suitable for
Aw, my `terminus` suggestion didn't make it. ☹️
Thanks,
Peter
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 12:55, Theodore Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:06 AM Matthew Brown
> wrote:
>
> > Hey everyone!
> >
> > The vote for adding noreturn is now open:
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/noreturn_type
> >
> > Voting will run through April 13th
>
> Hi Matt and Ondrej,
>
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 10:06 AM Matthew Brown wrote:
> Hey everyone!
>
> The vote for adding noreturn is now open:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/noreturn_type
>
> Voting will run through April 13th
Hi Matt and Ondrej,
Thanks for your work on this RFC. I voted for `never` as the type name
Hey everyone!
The vote for adding noreturn is now open:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/noreturn_type
Voting will run through April 13th
Best wishes,
Matt and Ondrej
29 matches
Mail list logo
