Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:117842 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 44782 invoked from network); 31 May 2022 14:18:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 31 May 2022 14:18:49 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CED8C180211 for ; Tue, 31 May 2022 09:02:49 -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=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS8560 212.227.0.0/16 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 31 May 2022 09:02:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1654012967; bh=Zm65EMw7VAMQ1m9BfKmhGA5OtJ9Rl2oe/Sq8MpZjvUk=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=PYQnxC7BXOhSJ64DM09uFaEUxevjBgwGN0WjJe0M+AA1MSEBcF/VtLtVt7u94TF4y LZuoUKqY+0BSEo0jLtvjI1Si+5NhfHw4gq9qx1vec5xuRLSTk9tWhLA+kMRGlv4bym JCPEe1WlZ4iJuRwX1FGYR41J4mq+RFFDu843VMYU= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [192.168.178.120] ([24.134.51.41]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M7sDg-1nr6WL2qos-00528z for ; Tue, 31 May 2022 18:02:47 +0200 Message-ID: <3208f1d6-ceea-85a9-4c5d-7d1090ababe3@gmx.net> Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 18:02:47 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0 Content-Language: en-US To: internals@lists.php.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:4tY11VTtwT/0AMMAN61ifZZBdSG2cjz53NymZxY1zGdKphdrT25 d/noe/BzuJKhmK3g7qWDIX3TAm9+6hZ0vAV/1HYk+JPdUsxmYgAIXWkx49KEUtG+J3dE24v CTti7TGU9sI7/3q9a+0CRFKBbQHlCgGXuZT6EJU5/i/KA8RAu8q+LtZ+gY5gyCigys61CJw DGbsTp2kIF31ScZce569w== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:lH1rI4T4Xbg=:ZsLDeFDIF4aVWF+Hka3K97 5EYxEGlsUM/0sAbLooDocQHZS1h2TLsDBlC+ySpRTf56iK8s8BunFG4DtJIdt7F0VdRxMRyxM mhFtK1NSwYbFdWBpwirs6SjHQr212tl9Acv7jxhBzxDQ4nQ7hVLE/9gRPAVcoAjna5vHbLHph kCTl5uiXd6ZOTETYYeEHvsEYi0206s4mRv85jBM97lBqbmfP2DGB+XCco6ivnXy4qNptavY7Y Zt2DLjtaK1iDRbT6Puen0LWGwj8LPf89MFN8xgCMVjZlHIaYc9P9wrqDQh+GwqnYvV57pEm/d npoqK+lA82rJHFOG9iHG/LHZcGH4lO2PwnibipoTTRRES/Eu7yb6r2lNpRosVzuVHt6lU7JSw wrQpz+QbOjhGlc/vXlP1vUxgowgz7ZsvArTGIpx7o7mELKLJo4w32vIrXJbVGQ0Etm+PemCC5 jIna2b518OMHNebJoDNGd04UbA4NFT+Qz4oTCB/mhny6J6pYgeZcnD2rIgnF6jKbJTx62KDoJ uV0pub3IScijbJwv3GsGwC8Q8TRyoKmWwcbpE6W7envlBwdt8tx0mCty/jGggPtL1NVIBzFV1 XhGsLEju83vkGWAwsznovqV0fEcmWp3OA7m+quCMv1EPC9qa+MQNUv5FGjbBcCe0rkMSYwqeW D9PJZLRxUOSCLJ7zX9Ip1OXlaueoxf4NlDO+Wco06qIDGwewF5/R8vp6BsA+fhG1RzYqMjfWv PU6oJYkmNE8xUEAQNnXViycuXVRHlHO3D6EmWacmcuTJ6jA/yBqoVXJTa6k0hvnr5Z0xUHOdQ X11XeKt92Jx23Tif+C547LGsqIGTbAISOU+MYfm7/delEu3+0rw2W+wkqfdVbzQRQE8RtIYax 0ki47HyGrHtaE69OtaVPd7e440atB3ZgzIZ2r8kGSJhSlgKXp5dH7D0XPPH0gExiK2m/h78Zk 8BotaA4SreOAnaCxZTLNv1iEdynZJAfajLMdrkqRT+fIzTNKSV27ASSw4E9RFRqlGeeSstrL6 2BxKBPMJZ6vem6GKPQObw0QEcD9Km21rl8fMO8oPnRJ3Luz0e6sq6steXWFuoSfPeOqv96fzJ R3dF6A/1UGsoIroO5ADL2M0oPeVoDtXhuD8le/6+mRhcsYnjr2lkayCTA== Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [Discussion] Stricter implicit boolean coercions From: a.leathley@gmx.net (Andreas Leathley) I have amended the RFC on https://wiki.php.net/rfc/stricter_implicit_boolean_coercions to address the feedback I got so far, I also added an overview of scalar type coercions to give a better sense of how these changes fit in with current type coercion behavior, and I added a Future Scope section with my plans to at some point do a follow-up RFC to make the implicit scalar type coercion behavior available to PHP developers explicitly and why that might make sense. Does anyone have any more feedback or questions on this, or something that is not considered? If not, I would start voting on Sunday (5th of June), but I am happy to extend the discussion time if needed.