Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71658
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.128.182 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGa2bXZan4ayTdoRiHFwLBBq4jy4HL1SpFrBC0F9di3v6N=tNg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <52DDBAE5.2010803@ajf.me>
	<52E6FD70.4010005@ajf.me>
	<CAGa2bXagoVcga5hWumfuM7Ef939dzaJP6nJj9RnfrTDUAW8GGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<52E70943.3010700@ajf.me>
	<CAHMUw2GfzEqBnchH974eOeV=9Bua9DXXo6YMruCP+3bXQDst2g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXZan4ayTdoRiHFwLBBq4jy4HL1SpFrBC0F9di3v6N=tNg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:12:33 +0800
Message-ID: <CAHMUw2GWs5Mhb7w24-j5JQy6ZYOxMNgX9kNsmEnw4w2JCp8bcg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>
Cc: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1136516cc032ab04f101b55e
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [VOTE] [RFC] Alphanumeric Decrement
From: tjerk.meesters@gmail.com (Tjerk Meesters)

--001a1136516cc032ab04f101b55e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi,


On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:

> Hi Tjerk,
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Tjerk Meesters <tjerk.meesters@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> I still have an RFC lying around that suggests this, together with some
>> other changes to how increment / decrement works. Perhaps we could flesh
>> this out further?
>>
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/normalize_inc_dec
>>
>
> The following behaviour is proposed:
>
> // booleans
> $a = false; ++$a; // bool(true)
> $a = true; --$a; // bool(false)
>
> // null values
> $a = null; --$a; // null
> $a = null; ++$a; // null
>
> // empty strings
> $a = ''; ++$a; // int(1)
>
> // non-numeric strings
> $a = '12d9';
> ++$a; // string(4) "12e0" + Notice: String increment is deprecated, use
> str_inc() instead in php shell code on line 1
> ++$a; // float(13)
>
> +1 especially  boolean++/--.
> It's great for flip flop. I guess most users use int++ and int%2 for flip
> flop currently.
> Existing scripts using ++/-- against bool would be a bug most likely.
>

The RFC doesn't mention this, but the intended behaviour is that `$a =
true; ++$a;` yields `bool(true)`, i.e. no overflow ... however, I'm open to
the suggestion to make it "overflowable", like integer values.

Btw, doing flip/flop can be done with `$val = (bool)1 - $val;` as well :)


>
> Other proposal sounds reasonable to me, too.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Yasuo Ohgaki
> yohgaki@ohgaki.net
>



-- 
--
Tjerk

--001a1136516cc032ab04f101b55e--