>From: "Jochem Maas" <jochem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Terje Slettebø wrote: > >>From: "Matthew Weier O'Phinney" <matthew@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Ah, I didn't know about that one. I didn't find it here: > > http://www.php.net/mailing-lists.php How can I subscribe to it? > > its alternatively call 'php internals' Ah. I thought that was something else. >, I have read a lot of your > questions/arguments regarding access/visibility/typehints - some of them > seem more a case of you needing to adjust to PHP's way of thinking that > that PHP necessarily does it wrong (its just very different to C/Java > :-), That may well be. :) As mentioned, I've worked with PHP a couple of years, but have been doing C++/Java much longer (and C before that). I have started to adjust to the dynamic nature of PHP, and as mentioned in another post, about variable variable functions and variables, there are some useful things that this enables, as well. Nonetheless, the discussion of explicit/implicit typing is a valid one, and my posts were not at least meant to see what other people think, and if there are other approaches that kind of compensate for the risk of bugs with implicit/dynamic typing. Guido van Rossum (Python's creator) and some others have argued that unit tests may make up for it. Well, unit tests are nice, but with type checking by the compiler/runtime, you may concentrate on the non-trivial tests instead, rather than testing something the compiler/runtime is perfectly able to do by itself. > then again other points you make are valid - either way I'm not the > one to judge --- I just thought I'd mention that such things have been > discussed/argued over on the php internals mailing list in some depth > over the last year, i.e. you may get very short answers :-) Well, but this is great news. :) I.e. then I have a place to look. As I said at the start, I hadn't found discussion about this, but then, I haven't really known which archive(s) to search, either. Of course, people won't have to go into a discussion that has happened before; just point to a previous one, as you did. :) > > P.S. Why does replies to list posting go to the sender, rather than the > > list, by default? Shouldn't reply-to be set to the list, as usual? I had to > > manually edit the address, to make the reply go to the list. > > don't even start about these mailing list setups! LOL. :) Apparently a recurring theme. :) > - be glad they work at > all :-) - btw, it seems, that on php mailing lists reply-all is the norm I use reply-all, but that also includes the sender as recipient, which I usually edit out: No need to give them two copies of a posting. > and that bottom-post are generally preferred to top-posts. Aren't they everywhere. ;) > PS - I enjoyed your posts! Thanks. :) I haven't received any flames, yet, at least. :) I didn't really know how they would be received, given that I don't know the community. (I've usually been hanging around the ACCU lists, as well as Boost, and comp.lang.c++.moderated, comp.std.c++, so I mostly know the C++ community.) Regards, Terje -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
