On 28 May 2022, at 07:25, Aleksander Machniak <a...@alec.pl> wrote: > > On 28.05.2022 04:36, Craig Francis wrote: >> On 8 Apr 2022, at 18:34, Craig Francis <cr...@craigfrancis.co.uk> wrote: >>> I've written a new draft RFC to address the NULL coercion problems: >>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coercion_consistency >> I give up. > > Don't give up. You have my Yes vote. > > Imo, the RFC: > - fixes real upgrade problem (very important), > - improves consistency in a better way than the solution introduced in 8.1. > - does not change strict_types behavior > > Some people don't care with what arguments their functions are called with. > As long as the value can be coerced to the expected type the function will do > what it is supposed to do. Other people have strict_types. All people don't > want to be forced to modify a working code. > > So, this is another "battle" between strict and non-strict camps. I'd like to > see which is the majority these days. I hope that even some strict-code > proponents can see this makes sense.
I'm sorry Aleksander. While I think this is the best approach as well, I don't have a vote, and I don't have the time/energy to respond to emails where I'm clearly not making any progress, or doing a good job of putting the case forward (for reference, each email usually takes a least an hour, as I want to make sure I've completely understood what the person is saying, and yay dyslexia). Anyway, I'm going away for a week (leaving in 1 hour), and when I get back, I *really* need to focus on other things (life, client work, and things related to `is_literal()`/`literal-string` which I am making some good progress on). Thank you for your comments though... and maybe you would be able to convince the other voters it's worth it? Keep in mind, even my quiz from a few months ago had split the room on this issue: https://quiz.craigfrancis.co.uk/ Craig -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
