Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93639
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.41 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jakub.php@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <e44e645e-8b6f-829d-b0da-f34d9b87acdb@fleshgrinder.com>
References: <CAGa2bXbBhJtKo2tk+6udr2UHJFe46fbcw2-+yatru4pO1CuXxw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEKnhAGHoPvxEtwCdJ7qM4UhbcBW7D6Mwk=R+0_Xa4Cgj02pGw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF+90c-MECPz1oPbC9MpvETkVAWXE1cQjKbB+jVac9Ng55ksrg@mail.gmail.com>
	<e44e645e-8b6f-829d-b0da-f34d9b87acdb@fleshgrinder.com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 20:07:04 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEKnhAErVRxmKsn1QYTOzvMMvoVCi1VQCVoTe_01TUOysLGFvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals list <internals@lists.php.net>
Cc: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0950364c7dc3053413f607
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] More precise float value
From: bukka@php.net (Jakub Zelenka)

--94eb2c0950364c7dc3053413f607
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 7:46 PM, Fleshgrinder <php@fleshgrinder.com> wrote:

> On 5/30/2016 8:28 PM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> > This proposal adds a new json.precision setting. Why? I've been told that
> > this is more flexible, which is fair enough, but imho we should have very
> > strong reasons for introducing new ini settings. Reasons that go beyond
> "it
> > might be useful to someone ... maybe?" So what's the particular use-case
> > here? Where is it necessary to export inaccurate floating point numbers
> in
> > JSON? And should such a use-case indeed exist, why is this a global
> setting
> > rather than an option of json_encode? Furthermore, note that even without
> > this new ini option, you always have the option of temporarily changing
> > serialize_precision for a json_encode call, if you *really* need it.
> >
>
> I second this remark especially because in my book JSON is just another
> form of serialization, hence, it should use the same setting.
>
> Additionally, how is it possible that global ini settings -- which in my
> opinion is a sensitive area -- can go through with a 50%+1 vote?
>

Not exactly a language change as it's changing default just for
serialization and json but it's probably on the edge so will change it to
66 in the next revision... ;)

Cheers

--94eb2c0950364c7dc3053413f607--