Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Allow int type argument to BCMath function
Hi Juliette,
> I honestly don't understand what you are saying here.
>
> If 0.285 is a string, then no type conversion would be needed to pass it to BCMath anyhow.
> Otherwise, 0.285 would be a floating point number already.
>
> If the type for BCMath would become int|string, in non-strict mode, there would be
> quite a significant change in behaviour for the BCMath functions as passing the _float_ 0.285 would
> previously result in the string "0.285" being passed to the BCMath function, but would now
> result in the integer 0 being passed.
>
> I think this BC-break will need to be called out as it is not mentioned in the RFC.
> I also think this BC-break should be enough reason not to accept the RFC.
I had overlooked the priority order of Union type casts, thank you.
I don't think a satisfactory specification will be decided on this before the feature freeze,
so I will not rush into discussing this RFC for now. Of course, no voting will take place until the
specifications are decided. If we were to discuss this change again, it would be in versions beyond
8.4.
Regards,
Saki
Thread (12 messages)