Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118533
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CANMwmbN8_Km+urXbNO7oWvNteYA2mTPNYyRgfaoypEK1Cw4F0A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+p1FaZDm3-h_LoOwv619wFyPg+2pAM8qC2La438sU_SPHZnCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdc3WqsDc+80ATdX9+qstOkf+eUYCAQNPeV_FXcHiFumVQb8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <8D53AD5B-7CFC-4820-9EE4-FEB365D327A8@woofle.net> <CABdc3Wo7_qJOtebvA2GNGFUGFAut3tJOShXDBLHnRKqhrwVJ-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <d2f2c96c-3d45-49fc-ad0b-16e5a578891c@www.fastmail.com> <CAGBsUrcVmKRz=X8B1pVxavh1WE3aYTOMEbiWeYqTgky67atAdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+p1FaZF8C12xn7q7r+1SGVHKca-+KWrv0WB1X-fSawnDz07GQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANLbj-rfHh9T84WJxcXW3nSj44mmXdDHT_XDM26WWKbiJKvJxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <afe236de-e35f-487a-93a6-250efc0f3f9d@www.fastmail.com> <CANMwmbOZNBR0gog0V_UH7LDL9JPNpsEmhQKrEmBFhxu-nR6T_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANMwmbOs5EPg5wOv1ULy+DEGr3mrwN4R8COMmrwMdCtWF36nPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANMwmbNw8ovHyXVL5dQg9ea8X4KcHrpHxgw2Q9fCn_vjiTx5eA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+p1FaY6N5E_g6LFNTbd7eZk4DoYVsg15ZcoYjLJi=DutinD-g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+p1FaY6N5E_g6LFNTbd7eZk4DoYVsg15ZcoYjLJi=DutinD-g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 10:45:45 +0200
Message-ID: <CANMwmbPmmn0CAK0QGg+KX7qfoCq1SsWfM8fM0556rwMMXNQ4FQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Gebler <davidgebler@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC json_validate() - status: Under Discussion
From: dev.juan.morales@gmail.com (juan carlos morales)

El s=C3=A1b, 27 ago 2022 a las 2:50, David Gebler (<davidgebler@gmail.com>)=
 escribi=C3=B3:
>
> You can always offer two votes on the RFC - one for the function itself, =
then one for should it return boolean or return an int representing the jso=
n_last_error constants and let it be decided that way.


Thanks for the advice I did not know that. At the moment this is the
only open question for this RFC, and I would like to know what the
people thinks about it, otherwise, will go with 2 votings.


> I think on the whole, I agree with the sentiment that returning boolean a=
nd checking json_last_error() on false is probably the best / least worst o=
ption.

> So if I could vote, I would vote yes and for the boolean option, with a s=
econdary preference for returning int if boolean option is rejected.

Thanks for the feedback.


> And I was unconvinced about the whole idea originally, so a good example =
of where positive, robust discussion can change someone's mind.


That is why we have these discussions :) .... thanks a lot for taking
your time on this.


> Good luck with progressing the RFC, I don't think I have anything else to=
 add.

Thanks a lot!