Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:117738
Message-ID: <b9f52679-8ef8-2f0d-0805-4c273cc4515f@seld.be>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 11:18:03 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <eb2bef11-4027-8555-93e3-89c2cc4f5a18@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <eb2bef11-4027-8555-93e3-89c2cc4f5a18@gmx.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [Discussion] Stricter implicit boolean coercions
From: j.boggiano@seld.be (Jordi Boggiano)

On 16/05/2022 17:06, Andreas Leathley wrote:
> Hello Internals,
>
> After the first discussion about this topic
> (https://externals.io/message/117608) I have created a preliminary
> implementation and an RFC for making implicit boolean type coercions
> more strict:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/stricter_implicit_boolean_coercions

Thanks for the RFC. I think it's overall a good idea, especially for 
cases like "false" => true, and arguably for ints >1/<0, but my gut 
feeling is the string=>bool deprecation will lead to a lot of pain.

I definitely see this being done in many places where you expect any 
string value to be true and an empty string to be false (without 
consideration for the "false" case which is more common in config style 
use cases).

I don't know what you could do to improve this without making the RFC 
useless though. I wish these things could be tried out in alpha or even 
up to early RC builds so we could hopefully get community feedback in 
before deciding whether it's worth the pain inflicted or not.

Best,
Jordi

-- 
Jordi Boggiano
@seldaek - https://seld.be