Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114939 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 53153 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2021 07:31:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 18 Jun 2021 07:31:21 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA84D1804C9 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 00:48:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from processus.org (ns366368.ip-94-23-14.eu [94.23.14.201]) (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 ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 00:48:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from authenticated-user (PRIMARY_HOSTNAME [PUBLIC_IP]) by processus.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 993BE5101324 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 07:48:30 +0000 (UTC) To: internals@lists.php.net References: Message-ID: <2768d3ca-7c4f-77f3-d9f5-ff09b932fc80@processus.org> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 09:48:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Authentication-Results: processus.org; auth=pass smtp.auth=pierre-php@processus.org smtp.mailfrom=pierre-php@processus.org X-Spamd-Bar: / Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] is_literal From: pierre-php@processus.org (Pierre) Le 18/06/2021 à 08:00, Craig Francis a écrit : > Keep in mind it might also become a dedicated type in the future. Hello, If so, why the question should not be about the type name instead ? It might raises different concerns and new arguments to this discussion ? What is this type ? What does it covers ? Can float, int, etc... be literals as well ? Are those subtypes of their actual existing related type ? What should be the behavior regarding user method typings, etc etc ? Instead of introducing is_literal() may be directly introducing those types could be a good idea as well ? Regards, -- Pierre