Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:98818
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <86e4681f-9030-80fc-896b-56255c4b84c7@beccati.com>
References: <CADxrgCMB6iz3XX-+yRp0vY0AVWuuL=VwrdLND_78GF0Vhu0K9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <5e3e3e9b-f5b9-a19e-c4cb-6af0f5985d94@beccati.com> <CADxrgCP1wa_HiDCujXZV1oEN0CXDzg32VkWDoOaa17s-+bQ9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <be118423-73db-8b1d-3461-91156dd09d54@beccati.com> <CF.A4.18853.7A11DE85@pb1.pair.com>
 <8923084a-a357-91e9-44b5-52a4af0a5df1@beccati.com> <CADxrgCOSCzzLObD0+D02cnYFYySgnKDPoKk8Q-ZZ86QcSsQY8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <86e4681f-9030-80fc-896b-56255c4b84c7@beccati.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 12:58:01 -0400
Message-ID: <CADxrgCPhnMiRZUYJdKV6fPYZoAmmMJrKQCnkaRLOOZ6DvAd-iQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113e64a68c57ee054d73cfc5
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] PDO Float Type
From: adambaratz@php.net (Adam Baratz)

--001a113e64a68c57ee054d73cfc5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>
> > I'd be most comfortable with this approach. I'd worry about adding a
> > PDO::PARAM_NUMERIC type without investigating how it needs to function
> for
> > each DB, which feels like scope creep. If it starts off as an alias for
> > PDO::PARAM_STR, there could be issues updating it to work correctly,
> > especially if the right design involves modeling the precision
> somewhere. I
> > added a "Future Scope" section covering this.
> >
> > Let me know if there are major problems with this or other points to
> cover.
> > Otherwise, I'll aim to open voting on Monday.
>
> Let's just agree to disagree. I believe they should be investigated and
> proposed in a single RFC. Having just one and relying on an obscure
> documentation warning is not enough IMHO.


I looked more closely at each of the APIs. My conclusion was that a single
type will be appropriate for floats, doubles, and fixed-precision. I
updated the RFC with details. If it's accepted, it could be worth including
some of this content in the documentation so people better understand the
impact of each PDO param type.

I'll create a separate thread to announce the vote.

Thanks,
Adam

--001a113e64a68c57ee054d73cfc5--