Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101832
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.223.181 as permitted sender)
To: Pedro Lacerda <pslacerda@gmail.com>, internals@lists.php.net
References: <CAKbGgYjWW18=JeUpirpovc8bAd+ed3T5Fz2GDub+C3uJVck+0w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5b21571e-722f-43e4-5c9c-4def39447e1e@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 21:18:22 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:58.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/58.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKbGgYjWW18=JeUpirpovc8bAd+ed3T5Fz2GDub+C3uJVck+0w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal to run all tests with and without strict_types
 enabled
From: smalyshev@gmail.com (Stanislav Malyshev)

Hi!

> My proposal is to run all tests with and without strict_types, skipping if
> necessary, and increasing the code coverage. Depending of you overral
> reception I'll create an RFC for it.

I am not sure what would be the advantage of this. Beyond testing
strict_types functionality itself (which of course should have its own
unit tests), the tests that test standard functioning of any function
would either supply correct arguments and then strict_types would be
irrelevant (provided it works as supposed to, which is tested by its own
tests) or provide incorrect arguments, and then strict_type tests should
be different from regular ones since the errors would be different, so
we'd have to write separate tests.
The only class of errors that could be found this way would be if we
somehow made such a mistake in defining the arguments of certain
function that strict_type version of it doesn't work but regular version
works fine. Which I guess is possible but does it worth the effort to
convert all tests? Not sure.
-- 
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev@gmail.com