rfc:internal_function_return_types
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
| rfc:internal_function_return_types [2015/02/05 03:42] – V0.1 reeze | rfc:internal_function_return_types [2015/02/05 03:50] – reeze | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| - ZEND_BEGIN_ARG_WITH_RETURN_TYPE_INFO() | - ZEND_BEGIN_ARG_WITH_RETURN_TYPE_INFO() | ||
| + | |||
| - ZEND_BEGIN_ARG_WITH_RETURN_TYPE_INFO_EX() | - ZEND_BEGIN_ARG_WITH_RETURN_TYPE_INFO_EX() | ||
| Line 46: | Line 47: | ||
| 1. Should we raise E_CORE_ERROR when error detected, should we just ignore it with a warning? | 1. Should we raise E_CORE_ERROR when error detected, should we just ignore it with a warning? | ||
| - | 2. Return Types RFC internally support Nullable Types, but user land not, this RFC also support that, | + | |
| - | | + | 2. Return Types RFC internally support Nullable Types, but user land not, this RFC also support that, should |
| ===== Unaffected PHP Functionality ===== | ===== Unaffected PHP Functionality ===== | ||
| Line 61: | Line 62: | ||
| ===== Patches and Tests ===== | ===== Patches and Tests ===== | ||
| - | Coming Soon | + | https:// |
| ===== Implementation ===== | ===== Implementation ===== | ||
rfc/internal_function_return_types.txt · Last modified: 2017/09/22 13:28 by 127.0.0.1