Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

Hi! > Admittedly Foo|Bar is of limited use, although there is some use. > Foo, however, has plenty of uses. That is a different topic, not related to exceptions at all. > I do agree with the sentiment that having Foo|Bar for catch but not for > function signatures is going to confuse people.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

On 04/18/2016 08:28 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: Hi! It's about the perception of consistency. "Oh, I can do this! Neat:" function neat(Foo | Bar $a) { ... } You shouldn't be able to do this, because it makes no sense - why would a function accept two random types and only them? That's

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Improving PHP's type system

On 4/18/16 4:34 AM, Tony Marston wrote: I repeat, where was the insult in the post in question? What exactly were the insulting words? I chose just one example: > Those who cannot write effective software without these "clever" > additions to the language are doing nothing but announcing to

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

On 4/18/16 2:24 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: I would like to note in general that following the latest fashion in academic development is not always a good idea for PHP. It's fine when you experiment with academic languages, but when you have language that a) focused on simplicity and low

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

Hi! > It's about the perception of consistency. "Oh, I can do this! Neat:" > > function neat(Foo | Bar $a) { ... } You shouldn't be able to do this, because it makes no sense - why would a function accept two random types and only them? That's probably a bad design - it should be one type or

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > catch constitutes a formal signature, exactly like a function signature. > In > > my mind, this proposal and the union types proposal are intrinsically > tied. > > If we have one, we must have the other.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Add IntlTimeZone::getWindowsID() and IntlTimeZone::getIDForWindowsID() to ext/intl

I just wanted to personally thank Sara Golemon, and the PHP internals team, for being so incredibly approachable, open, and all-around awesome. The fact that a simple, informal tweet can turn into a core feature is incredible: https://twitter.com/trevorsuarez/status/709864419753377792 Thanks

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

Hi! > catch constitutes a formal signature, exactly like a function signature. In > my mind, this proposal and the union types proposal are intrinsically tied. > If we have one, we must have the other. If not, we're inducing a sadness. This has nothing to do with union types. It is just a

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Marco Pivetta wrote: > > I voted "NO" due to previous discussion. TL;DR: this is FAR off the 80/20 > use-case for a language syntax change. > > ... > These 3 exceptions usually result in separate handling anyway. If same > handling is needed,

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Functional Interfaces

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > >> Please review the following RFC: >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/functional-interfaces >> An implementation is provided, and is testable on 3v4l. > > This looks like a rather narrow case already

[PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Octal overflow detection

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Sara Golemon wrote: > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/octal.overload-checking > Because having this expression evaluate to true makes me sad: ("\000" > === "\400") > I haven't heard any responses on this and wanted to bump it back to the top of your

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

On 18/04/16 20:08, Fleshgrinder wrote: > This is however a useful shortcut and shortcuts are good things in > terms of usability if done write. Think of + vs. right click >> > copy (or any other example of useful keyboard shortcuts). Except when some sod adds a or decides left click is quicker

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Functional Interfaces

Hi! 2016-04-18 15:17 GMT-04:00 Stanislav Malyshev : > Hi! > > > Please review the following RFC: > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/functional-interfaces > > > > An implementation is provided, and is testable on 3v4l. > > This looks like a rather narrow case

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

Hi! > Even this is a scary way to do it. As you don't know which exception > class you have, how would you know how to handle each separately. You'd > have to if ($caught instanceof InvalidArgumentException) etc to be sure > that what you're doing with the object is allowed. I just recently

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Functional Interfaces

Hi! > Please review the following RFC: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/functional-interfaces > > An implementation is provided, and is testable on 3v4l. This looks like a rather narrow case already covered by anonymous classes. Am I missing something? What is the added value of it

Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal: Startup snapshot for optimizing app load time

Hi, Le 13/04/2016 17:55, Lin Yo-An a écrit : Hi internals, The javascript engine V8 uses a strategy called "startup snapshot" to optimize app load time (see http://v8project.blogspot.tw/2015/09/custom-startup-snapshots.html for more details) The approach used by V8 creates a snapshot from

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

On 4/18/2016 7:22 AM, Marcio Almada wrote: > 2016-04-17 23:56 GMT-04:00 Larry Garfield : >> Rather than debate the relative merits of Null as a concept, since I think >> all agree removing Null from the language is not even a thing, what do you >> think of my recommendation

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] Add session_gc()

Hi! >> Document calling session_gc() periodically is the best practice. > > If you want to document usage of this new API as the best practice, it > would be unfair to the users if you don't also document the caveats that > come with it: I also think it's wrong to document it so. While having

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

On 18/04/16 19:24, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > If your database died, your DB-bound code is not going > to fix it. With or without nulls - it has to just fail and wait for > somebody to fix it. There's no need to overcomplicate that. If the DB read failed due to the connection being lost, then

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

On 4/18/2016 8:24 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >> to have them calls them a "billion dollar mistake", many languages >> actively avoid having NULL in favor of something deliberately more >> structured. NULLs are a very common cause of avoidable fatal errors in >> many languages (including PHP).

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Typed properties patch

Hi! > right. > I don't see any reasons for types, if they are not guaranteed anyway. Well, we already have parameter types, and they are not guaranteed either - you can reassign variables. > This depends on use case. > Just imagine matrix multiplication (or something similar). > Few additional

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Functional Interfaces

+1 for the feature, very nice syntactic sugar to solve some edge cases. I agree with Rowan, i also do not like the name and propose to call them *closure interfaces*. There are already various synonyms for closures: - anonymous function - lambda function - callback* However, the strongest

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

Hi! > I am not sure what you're implying by "some people have no appreciation > of the usefulness of"... I am well aware of NULL's use cases. I am also > well aware that the general zeitgeist in the language development > community is that they're dangerous; the designer of the first language I

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

On 18/04/16 17:57, Larry Garfield wrote: > On 4/18/16 3:00 AM, Lester Caine wrote: >> On 18/04/16 04:56, Larry Garfield wrote: >>> 2) Doesn't make it quite so easy, which hopefully discourages (but does >>> not prohibit) its usage. >> This implies that using 'null' is wrong ... and is a slippery

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

On 18 April 2016 at 16:17, Derick Rethans wrote: > If they are user defined exceptions, you should make them implement an > interface, Even within one oranisation, getting different teams to agree to common interfaces is not always possible. But when the exceptions are

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

On 4/18/16 3:00 AM, Lester Caine wrote: On 18/04/16 04:56, Larry Garfield wrote: 2) Doesn't make it quite so easy, which hopefully discourages (but does not prohibit) its usage. This implies that using 'null' is wrong ... and is a slippery slope to then 'disabling' null where some people think

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Types

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote: > The grammar is taken from HHVM. > Using any other would make more mess. > I agree

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

On Mon, 18 Apr 2016, Marco Pivetta wrote: > Heya, > > I voted "NO" due to previous discussion. TL;DR: this is FAR off the 80/20 > use-case for a language syntax change. I'm with you on this one. > C from my answer elsewhere: > > The following typical example is something REALLY rare, and

Re: [PHP-DEV] Trying to fix "use" language inconsistencies

You missed what I said. You can do multiple single class/function/constant in a single statement, but you cannot do multiple group use in a single statement. This: use Foo\Bar, Foo\Baz\{Qux, Corge}; Regards, On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Lin Yo-An wrote: > I

RE: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

> -Original Message- > From: Marco Pivetta [mailto:ocram...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 4:41 PM > To: Dan Ackroyd > Cc: Bronisław Białek ; PHP internals > > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Catching Multiple Exception Types

Heya, I voted "NO" due to previous discussion. TL;DR: this is FAR off the 80/20 use-case for a language syntax change. C from my answer elsewhere: The following typical example is something REALLY rare, and requiring a parser change for it seems excessive: try { // ... } catch

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Functional Interfaces

Joe Watkins wrote on 18/04/2016 12:53: Morning, > I must admit to being a bit confused by the term "functional interface" at first, though, > because "functional" has so many different meanings - is this a term used elsewhere, > or is it up for debate? The terminology is

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Functional Interfaces

Morning, > I must admit to being a bit confused by the term "functional interface" at first, though, > because "functional" has so many different meanings - is this a term used elsewhere, > or is it up for debate? The terminology is borrowed, Java 8 uses lamdas to implement specially

[PHP-DEV] NEUTRAL Benchmark Results for PHP Master 2016-04-18

Results for project PHP master, build date 2016-04-18 06:35:14+03:00 commit: 60b1441 previous commit:a186ac0 revision date: 2016-04-07 10:26:32+09:00 environment:Haswell-EP cpu:Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz 2x18 cores, stepping 2, LLC 45 MB

Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Functional Interfaces

Joe Watkins wrote on 18/04/2016 11:22: Please review the following RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/functional-interfaces An implementation is provided, and is testable on 3v4l. This sounds like a really nice feature. As well as using functions to implement existing interfaces,

[PHP-DEV] Force pushed to PHP-7.0 branch

Hi, by accident a developer pushed master onto the PHP-7.0 branch. A force push was used to repair the repository. The broken state has been backed up here: https://github.com/johannes/php-src/tree/backup-broken-7.0 From there the revision has been reverted to 8f35ee49ee. If you pulled within

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC:generics]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Josh Di Fabio wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Rasmus Schultz wrote: >> Hello internals, >> >> I'd like to introduce an RFC proposing the addition of generic types >> and functions: >> >>

[PHP-DEV] RFC: Functional Interfaces

Morning Internals, Please review the following RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/functional-interfaces An implementation is provided, and is testable on 3v4l. Review of the implementation from those of you that do that would be good :) Cheers Joe

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC:generics]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Rasmus Schultz wrote: > Hello internals, > > I'd like to introduce an RFC proposing the addition of generic types > and functions: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/generics > > Ben Scholzen started this RFC as a quick draft with a few code samples

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Typed properties patch

On 04/15/2016 11:07 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: Hi! In most cases we avoid IS_UNDEF checks, verifying the most probable expected types first. But that's for something like ADD, not for property fetches, so I'm not sure I understand how properties fit there yet. Does the optimization also

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Types

The grammar is taken from HHVM. Using any other would make more mess. Thanks. Dmitry. From: Tom Worster Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 04:54 To: Dmitry Stogov; internals Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Types On 4/15/16 1:58 PM,

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Improving PHP's type system

wrote in message news:57135893.3070...@fleshgrinder.com... On 4/17/2016 11:19 AM, Tony Marston wrote: Where is the insult in what I wrote? You are not only insulting people in this thread, you do it in every thread you contribute to. You were exhorted multiple times for doing so. Pretending

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] Add session_gc()

Hi, On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Hi Stas, > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Stanislav Malyshev > wrote: > >> Lack of proper API for required task is our problem. Misuse is not > ours. IMHO. > > > > No, it is our problem. We

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullable Return Type Declaration

On 18/04/16 04:56, Larry Garfield wrote: > 2) Doesn't make it quite so easy, which hopefully discourages (but does > not prohibit) its usage. This implies that using 'null' is wrong ... and is a slippery slope to then 'disabling' null where some people think it should be removed. If PHP

Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] Add session_gc()

Hi, On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 3:26 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > > Probability based GC is unreliable and can reactivate very old sessions > without "Precise session management RFC" and you opposed the RFC. > > While I agree that calling session_gc() on a regular basis is the