Per Jessen wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Tony Marston wrote:
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?
Because your desired functionality is already satisfied by other
programming languages. PHP is an interpreted language with all the
strengths and weaknesses that come with it. A need for static or
compile-time typing is a need for a different language, honestly.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
why so strongly against having *optional* static typing?
You can't have your cake and eat it. You can't/shouldn't have strong
and loose typing in the same language. In my opinion.
"Instead of providing programmers with a black or white choice between
static or dynamic typing, we should instead strive for softer type
systems. That is, static typing where possible, dynamic typing when
needed. Unfortunately there is a discontinuity between contemporary
statically typed and dynamically typed languages as well as a huge
technical and cultural gap between the respective language communities."
"The problems surrounding hybrid statically and dynamically typed
languages are largely not understood, and both camps often use arguments
that cut no ice. We argue that there is no need to polarize the
differences, and instead we should focus on leveraging the strengths of
each side." [1]
IMHO if it was to classify all the languages (specifically server side
languages for web apps), PHP has 95% of the features i need, the rest
come no where near, so it's the obvious candidate to get this
remaining 5% that'd make it perfect and open it up to a whole set of
new users and markets.
_If_ the remaining 5% will really "open it up to a whole set of new
users and markets", all you have to do is sit back and wait. I'm not
so sure though.
One of the great things about PHP is that it is easy and approachable
for beginners, also without formal computer science training. Write
some code, bang it in a webserver, and bob's your uncle.
If we make PHP more complex, we might well lose that.
completely agree; it would all be optional though (much like the already
existing type hinting) - so I can't see it having any impact on anybody
already using php or anybody learning (any negative imapact that is)
By all means create a PHP++, but leave PHP as it is. It has
enough "feature"-bloat already.
you do have a good point, I've thought that myself often and indeed it
was brought up in the namespace discussions - however if it's optional
then why fork?
* 1 - http://pico.vub.ac.be/~wdmeuter/RDL04/papers/Meijer.pdf
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
