Am 26.04.2022 um 11:54 schrieb Andreas Leathley <a.leath...@gmx.net>:
> I have not found any past proposals or discussions to change boolean
> coercions, so I would like to find out how the thoughts on internals are
> to change this, or if there are any reasons not to change this that I
> have not thought of.
There are two big reasons:
- BC: Checking for the truthiness of a value is very common and would require a
lot of code changes.
- Some of us like the conciseness of "if ($foo) ...", see below
> I can also see a case for allowing the strings 'true' and 'false', and
> changing 'false' to be coerced to false, but that would be a BC break. I
> am not sure if that is worthwhile.
I'm definitely against adding more special cases like 'false'.
Side-note: Removing something like '0' => false is also a BC break, not just
adding 'false'.
> Anything else would emit either a notice or a warning as a first step
> (to be determined). My main goal would be to make these
> probably-not-boolean usages more visible in codebases. Depending on the
> feedback here I would create an RFC and try to do an implementation (to
> then discuss it in more detail), so as of now this is mostly about
> getting some basic feedback on such a change, and if someone else has
> had any similar thoughts/plans.
One of the big issues I have with this (as well as undefined variables not
being allowed in if ($foo)) is that the replacement constructs are clunky:
if ($foo) =>. if (!empty($foo))
For me this is quite a regression in readability but then again that's a matter
of taste.
And would !empty($foo) even work in your world or how would empty() be defined?
Regards,
- Chris
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
