I accidentally wrote the name in Japanese and it looks weird, so I'll resend it, sorry.
I also skimmed over past discussions. I've found that having full control over `strict_types` globally is not a good idea. This is because it can break the behavior of many libraries, and developers don't always respond appropriately to this fix. So I came up with the following idea. Allows a new value of 2 for strict_types. However, since magic numbers make the code difficult to read, I thought it would be a good idea to also provide strings that can serve as constants and aliases. This could provide new options to users while safely maintaining backwards compatibility. example: ``` // weak declare(strict_types=0); declare(strict_types='weak'); declare(strict_types=STRICT_TYPE_MODE_WEAK); // strict declare(strict_types=1); declare(strict_types='strict'); declare(strict_types=STRICT_TYPE_MODE_STRICT); // strict with internal func declare(strict_types=2); declare(strict_types='strict_with_internal_func'); declare(strict_types=STRICT_TYPE_MODE_WITH_INTERNAL_FUNC); ``` I need more time to come up with a better name. Saki -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
