Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:110351
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 13:30:16 +0100
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <CADK1yXLJ0+YxGDscVq1nUpSRkgmV+Ej9=vi9UW__0KDy7AxNSw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADK1yX+HbuTP-81ABdANHZidLm7zorM9n-7Q6NmP_aDDv_R+8Q@mail.gmail.com> <CALKiJKr1bM32aV_zm9BcPnwjZC8pbSFyr6citDApHkp6oHw04A@mail.gmail.com> <CADK1yXLJ0+YxGDscVq1nUpSRkgmV+Ej9=vi9UW__0KDy7AxNSw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
CC: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <69992337-7A48-4E2E-9C6E-F07897847EAF@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Numeric Type
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins)

On 3 June 2020 09:50:23 BST, Deleu <deleugyn@gmail=2Ecom> wrote:
> `is_numeric` has been with PHP for
>so long that I don't think we would ever be able to have a `numeric`
>type-hint that doesn't align with it, which imho means we either have it =
or
>we don't, a 3rd option where a possible type-hint that is inconsistent wi=
th
>the function seems worse than not having it=2E


I agree, but my conclusion is that the best answer is "don't have it" - I =
don't think the use cases are common enough to deserve a language feature r=
ather than just using the existing function=2E



>My point is that I don't look at the language validation to protect my co=
de
>against unexpected values and I can setup validation to deal with that=2E


If it's not to protect against unexpected values, then what is it for?



>What complicates things is that I want to avoid having a force-cast
>which is not safe for my usage because I want to preserve `null`


Yes, the combination of strict cast and nullable cast would sometimes be u=
seful, although the syntax might get messy - (int?!)$foo looks horrible=2E

Since we already have ?int though, this doesn't seem a strong reason to ad=
d ?numeric meaning almost the same thing=2E



> while not having to disable strict_types

It feels a bit like you want to "have your cake and eat it" here - if you =
want a loose check and aren't worried about a few unusual values getting th=
rough, why are you running in strict_types mode in the first place?


Regards,

--=20
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]