rfc:reclassify_e_strict
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionLast revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
rfc:reclassify_e_strict [2015/03/15 15:39] – nikic | rfc:reclassify_e_strict [2015/04/01 09:59] – nikic | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
* Date: 2015-02-22 | * Date: 2015-02-22 | ||
* Author: Nikita Popov < | * Author: Nikita Popov < | ||
- | * Status: | + | * Status: |
===== Introduction ===== | ===== Introduction ===== | ||
Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
Reason: If the same signature mismatch occurs when implementing an interface or an abstract function a fatal error is thrown instead of a strict standards notice. A signature mismatch is a significant issue, which will likely prevent the use of the child object in place of the parent object. | Reason: If the same signature mismatch occurs when implementing an interface or an abstract function a fatal error is thrown instead of a strict standards notice. A signature mismatch is a significant issue, which will likely prevent the use of the child object in place of the parent object. | ||
- | |||
- | Possible alternative: | ||
==== Same (compatible) property in two used traits ==== | ==== Same (compatible) property in two used traits ==== | ||
Line 170: | Line 168: | ||
===== Vote ===== | ===== Vote ===== | ||
- | Requires a 2/3 majority, as it is a language change. | + | Requires a 2/3 majority, as it is a language change. Voting started on 2015-03-15 and ended on 2015-03-25. |
- | <doodle title=" | + | <doodle title=" |
* Yes | * Yes | ||
* No | * No |
rfc/reclassify_e_strict.txt · Last modified: 2017/09/22 13:28 by 127.0.0.1