On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 11:43 AM Nikita Popov <nikita....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 6:30 PM Benjamin Morel <benjamin.mo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi internals, > > > > I'd like to bring back the topic of supporting "true" as a type in PHP 8 > > union types. > > Now that the RFC <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/union_types_v2> has been > > successfully voted, I'd like to revive the discussion about adding the > > "true" pseudo-type in addition to "false". > > > > In addition to my Packagist survey > > <https://externals.io/message/106844#107304>, I'd like to point out > that I > > just came across a native method in the SSH2 extension, that does use > true > > as a type: > > > > https://www.php.net/manual/en/function.ssh2-auth-none.php > > > > > > Returns TRUE if the server does accept "none" as an authentication > method, > > > or an array of accepted authentication methods on failure. > > > > > > > > Of course, you could type-hint it array|bool, but the same could be said > > for |false. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Generally I'm fine with also allowing the "true" type. We certainly have > quite a few extension methods that return isolated true values for legacy > reasons. However, before "true" is allowed, it is important to answer the > two questions at the end of > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/union_types_v2#literal_types. > > Namely, how do true/false interact with weak typing coercions (currently > "false" only accepts "false", but not 0 or "") and whether true|false > should be equivalent to bool (also related to the previous question). > > Regards, > Nikita > Hi, I think we can continue in a similar conservative approach, without coercion for *true*, similar as for *false*. For the cases mentioned so far, we are interested in exactly the true value, not true-ish value like 1. This would make *true|false* not equivalent with *bool* when strict_types is not enabled and equivalent when strict_types is enabled. Alex
