On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 at 18:39, Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
> I'm not suggesting a separate RFC for each. One RFC with several votes in > it is fine, IMO. > > What I disagree with is changing the definition of strict_types=0 from > "use the well-documented coercion logic at parameter and return points" to > "use the well-documented parameter and return points, and also add implicit > nullability but only for internal functions, sometimes". > Thanks Larry, that's fair... I can do that, and update the documentation as well (will wait a bit to see if anyone else has any feedback). Now the next problem, if we are going to have "One RFC with several votes"... I've got 276 functions (336 arguments) which I think should preserve their old behaviour (as in, there is no reason why a Fatal Error should happen with a NULL value in PHP 9). It might be possible to group them, like the 60 functions just related to encoding values... because voting for them all individually in an RFC would be a pain (I should know, I was checking each one). Or should I setup a survey to make it a bit easier to collect yes/no feedback before the actual RFC vote? I could add a feature to tick or untick all by default. Craig As a side note, there are 99 functions on the "probably not" list (aka maybe)... and 442 on the "other" list (the edge cases, like `$method` in `method_exists()`, that would be weird if it was given a NULL).
