On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@xxxxxx> wrote: > There has already been at least one closely related report, and this > has been tagged as "not a bug", so it probably doesn't make sense to > report the issue again. :) > That's a bummer. Leaving the boolean alias in but working in only some cases is a recipe for confusion as this thread shows. But thanks for the background; though I disagree with their position, at least I know about it now. Didn't G.I. Joe have something to say about knowing? ;) Note that NULL is acceptable if given as default argument, though. > Ah, well half a loaf and all that... That requires all following parameters to become optional too, but at least it's possible. On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Daniel Korner <daniel.korner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote: > I guess I'm going to avoid aliases as much as possible. > Wise advice! Anyway, I think this sort of information (no alias support for type hinting) > should be in the documentation (at least as a side note). I'm going to > open a > ticket for that :) > Agreed, and if you post the URL I'll gladly vote for it. Thanks, David
