Hi, Tim-Hinnerk There are some things you have to keep in mind when using Hack (and some of those were the reason why I haven't used it until now): You can decide in every file if you want to use Hack or not. Just use "<?hh" for files, you want to use Hack and use "<?php" or start with non-code for all other files. There are some limitations on that when these two files have classes or interfaces implemented in the other language. Please read more here: http://docs.hhvm.com/manual/en/install.hack.conversion.php Here are some characteristics of Hack: * To promote best practices, you cannot mix Hack with HTML (or other non-code text) * All hack files must start with <?hh * There is no closing tag for hack files * Hack also has multiple modes * XHTML can be embedded using XHP, which makes XHTML tags into language constructs (Source: https://blog.engineyard.com/2014/hhvm-hack-php#file-semantics it may changed in later versions) You can use every PHP framework that is supports HHVM 3.0 or later (Hack has been included in HHVM since then). Here's a list of popular frameworks and how good HHVM supports them: http://hhvm.com/frameworks/ The limitations for me were the lack of extensions. Here's a list of PHP extensions that have been ported to HHVM: https://github.com/facebook/hhvm/wiki/extensions There may be some not listed here, but this is the most complete list I could get hands on ;) Hope this helps you to decide if Hack is something for you :) Bye, Simon On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Tim-Hinnerk Heuer <tim@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Yes, of course! Thanks! Came across HHVM a while back but didn't remember > this, sorry. Does this mean that existing PHP code and frameworks can be > used with Hack? If yes, it would mean it's exactly what I am looking for. > Does hack provide type definition files like TS? > > It seems like transpilation is not exactly what Hack does though. > > On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 at 16:12 Muddsar Jamil <mjamil114@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Check out http://hacklang.org/ - I think it has what you're looking for. > > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Tim-Hinnerk Heuer <tim@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> Hi there, > >> > >> The single most annoying feature about PHP I find is that there are no > >> optional types for variables. Otherwise, I think PHP is great: great > >> community, lots of code and contributors etc. > >> > >> Just out of curiosity, do you think it would be possible and feasible to > >> design a Typed PHP similar to TypeScript in JavaScript? So, a super set > of > >> PHP that is optionally typed and can be compiled/transpiled to normal > PHP? > >> I think this should be quite possible and possibly a great addition to > the > >> language. It would need to not break the current syntax but provide > better > >> tooling in IDEs and editors. Someone has already had a similar idea: > >> https://github.com/krakjoe/strict > >> > >> However, I would propose a technology that transpiles to "normal" PHP. > The > >> types would be solely there for better tooling support and YES, better > >> auto > >> complete! An extension wouldn't be required. Typed PHP would just be a > >> super set of normal PHP and all existing code could be re-used just like > >> in > >> Type Script. You could also have .d.tphp files, similar to TS and > annotate > >> existing libraries for better auto complete. I have come across Type > >> Script > >> not so long ago and it is really good in my opinion. People can still > >> develop in the not strictly typed language while others more inclined to > >> use strict types can use them but do not have to. > >> > >> Similar to TS you could have .tphp files that compile to readable .php > >> files without having to re-engineer PHP or write extensions. The > benefits > >> should be obvious: Maximum code re-usability while providing better code > >> maintenance and tooling. > >> > >> I think the exact syntax can be discussed and should be to not break > >> anything while having a terse syntax, that is readable and writable. I > >> could propose some syntax ideas that would be similar to TS syntax, but > >> wanted to put the idea out there first. Maybe you will say this is > >> absolutely crazy and cannot be done, but I challenge this belief. > >> > >> Kind regards, > >> Tim > >> > > > > >
