"Nathan Rixham" <nrixham@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:49723749.4070904@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Tony Marston wrote: >> "Nathan Rixham" <nrixham@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message >>> >>> a: Optional Static Typing >>> I'm finding an ever increasingly need to be able to staticly type >>> properties, parameters, return types etc (in classes) I know there is >>> type hinting but it's just not enough to do what one needs. Additionally >>> support for staticly typing primatives. Here's an example: >> >> If you really *need* to used a staticly typed language then don't use >> PHP, and don't try to change PHP to match your needs. > > why not? php fills 95% of my needs in most instances, I'm as much a valid > user of php as you and php *could* change to fit my needs and others, not > without some appreciated work mind you, but it could (and without > affecting anybody else in this case) ABSOLUTE RUBBISH! You cannot change PHP from being dynamicly typed to staticly typed without affecting 99% of the millions of programs which hav already been written. Personally I love the idea that a function's argument can be either a string or an array (or whatever) as PHP makes it easy to detect what type it is, and I can easily cast it to another type and deal with it as I see fit. This to me is a GREAT ADVANTAGE and NOT a limitation. > it's a simple need: if I can type that my variable can only contain an > int, then I know it's always an int without tonnes of checks to check it > actually contains an int / is getting set with an int throughout the rest > of the app (especially when multiple dev's are working on it). > > additionally this functionality would open the door to the creation of a > lot more apps and frameworks, Not in my (not so humble) opinion. > not least the ability to create decent ORM's. Proper progammers do not need any steeenking ORMs. > Further, it would allow people to contribute proper developers classes > that can be re-used time and time again Your definition of "proper" obviously disagrees with mine. > (for instance a full set of collections [class, hashmap, map, list, set > etc etc]). Once they're made and open source we all benefit, not only that > but they could be made by users instead of the internals team ;) > >>> b: Object superclass >>> A base class type which all objects automagically extend, with (if >>> nothing else) a unique id / hashcode for each object (much like the Java >>> Object class). Failing this some form of function to get a unique >>> reference string for any variable. Example >> >> Why should each class automaticaly extend a base class? For what purpose? >> For what benefit? I can achieve what I want without this *feature*, so I >> don't need it. > > 2 reasons: > 1: it would allow all objects to have this uniqueid/hashcode i need > 2: it would allow one to type hint Object in methods (you currently > can't) - you can method(array $var) but not method(object $var) see: > > <?php > class Example { > public function someMethod(object $arg0) { > } > } > > $e = new Example(); > $e->someMethod( (object)'y' ); > ?> > returns: Catchable fatal error: Argument 1 passed to > Example::someMethod() must be an instance of object > >> Why does each object need a unique id/hashcode? I have been using objects >> for years without this so it is not necessary, and does not provide any >> additional functionality. > > for comparison of equality, so you can make indexed arrays quickly using > the hashcode (you know like a hash table) so you can quickly tell the > difference between two instances of the same object with the same values > that are infact different, makes persisting data a 100 times easier... > >> Why do you need a unique reference string for each variable? WTF! > > well because $a = 's'; $b = 's'; both are unique, internally php must hold > a reference of some sort to each variable and where it's stored that is > entirely unique; it would simply be a case of exposing this functionality > /or/ adding functionality based on this. > >>> c: Method overloading >>> TBH it's something I could live without, whereas a/b aren't, but it >>> would be an ideal addition to php? >> >> PHP does not need method overloading as is found in other languages as it >> has optional parameters with defaults. It is also possible to cast each >> parameter into wahetever type is necessary. It achieves the same result >> but using a different method. > > the same functionality can be achieved, however not without a lot of > additional code to test variable types using conditional blocks with lots > of is_ and instanceof comparisons; adding method overloading is by no > means needed but would majorly simplify the code of scripts which need > this functionality. I disagree. >> Absolute rubbish! You have obviously been used to a different language >> and have recently moved to PHP, but cannot get used to the fact that it >> *IS* a different language, therefore it has different syntax and achieves >> similar things in different ways. If your feeble brain can't handle the >> differences then I suggest you stick with your previous language and >> LEAVE PHP ALONE! > > actually I've been a senior php dev for 5 years and muddled along trying > to help people out on this list for a long time too - it is my primary > language, PHP always changes and the beauty of the language is that it > tries to allow people to program the way they want, hence it being both > procedural and object orientated, obviously there's a need for this > otherwise Type Hinting would never have been introduced. > > PHP could easily be a one for all language and AFAIK the only major > functionality missing is static typing..? I'm not trying to knock PHP, > simply expand it's functionality and scope by having additional *optional* > functionality implemented - like namespaces, if you don't like 'em don't > use 'em. Static typing is not an option that can be turned ON or OFF. A language is either one or the other. >> >> That's just my opinion, of course. >> And I think your opinion is totally without merit. -- Tony Marston http://www.tonymarston.net http://www.radicore.org > and really thanks! gives me the chance to explain a bit more :p > > ps: feeble lol -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
