Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:108606 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 77834 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2020 20:21:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 15 Feb 2020 20:21:41 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2687D180537 for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 10:36:39 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-wr1-f47.google.com (mail-wr1-f47.google.com [209.85.221.47]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 10:36:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-f47.google.com with SMTP id y17so14827811wrh.5 for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 10:36:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=x2maC30dMct1LqZQ6ZsYTS++RBfKaetAQH/XPUcNu3U=; b=Xq/tI3TDu8UegiryN24+YGs55xR/JBXtTSiAkBZywRSshfq49/KQwAuYhVdsD5NXpL OwwPpT4QqDxwpVEI+ivsFKDEXTARntoiPwFCUf77RGMZ08YI17JL/e6JcXkEggZTkCt5 GE2VFj5jb4zmwdBeI1q2fXr4SJ178ZO16/9dXiLQAzKSa5pUjTxWb8i25NEZ8uxAUrq4 dlskqvACPLLhrGW4UVNsK1yUjvE4StAtAp4EEkRSG67opmJHO/EBzbflWaavS5cZWai9 /uAy2LVlKJOOjRoy8MM50JjX6EUZzFz6/d04/caqwy56Ig61M0ZeIWMEaL+4V/njy1AR sdhw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=x2maC30dMct1LqZQ6ZsYTS++RBfKaetAQH/XPUcNu3U=; b=CiNMUh3IPvkXeBV6uAV9SwvXIrVvNZayHLYT/QtbfyjdFzMykm+sLrYwfbVJprfa5G lkV/InQ07UZj36Kb60tLkMbbK/xW1P1cA6ibDFcQUqeV/MJ/U/NUIgX4Whe4HPXfHxAr B2aWStBj0sMkzDJ0TJRzEEnip0gx74aPxaK3hUzn6KNx+MIXm8JAICjn1C4b2Rkp7PoP yb1lQRAk+M767WUC6G9lNWiHQFA9vTod4IhntBa/aV2aCAwFnQ6m3Jq02ffPD3+MGGmk +X1K4hzrmXGhMus0QlewnDqEc3CRSI/XoRxdHfM5OyuEPPtcicUJd36RORO7P/2SnNiP yiIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV/Ay3ZVpZqflizzZteKEOkCH0Ftb7ygPMezFUijG+yHhT629vm suRWlIFZBg3PygnZyo1DLI/BBME6 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyEnLZf7oisqwaJe0wnoETMklHjaPXCkMUNG/a5G7aAmTky/KIdHSx2lamtTho7bwOioPJD2w== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e9d2:: with SMTP id l18mr11187145wrn.344.1581791797249; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 10:36:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.14] (cpc84253-brig22-2-0-cust114.3-3.cable.virginm.net. [81.108.141.115]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id t12sm12030637wrq.97.2020.02.15.10.36.36 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 15 Feb 2020 10:36:36 -0800 (PST) To: internals@lists.php.net References: <16481aca-93f4-43f5-5ec2-413d19ade318@gmail.com> <5e4836cf.1c69fb81.e7162.12dcSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <4a2d2d3f-a714-09de-35d2-e0827217a3df@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2020 18:36:35 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5e4836cf.1c69fb81.e7162.12dcSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Allow null variables to be decremented From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins) On 15/02/2020 18:21, Mark Randall wrote: > I'm not so sure... > > That incrementing a null works at all is a painful part of the > language spec that I would argue needs flushing down the toilet, > rather than further reinforcing. The problem then is, where do you stop? There are dozens of places where null values are coerced to the correct type, and changing them all would be a huge BC break. I think it would be perfectly fine to fix the current bug - that it's completely inconsistent in leaving the variable unchanged - even if we later decide to deprecate the whole thing. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins (né Collins) [IMSoP]