On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 at 10:19 pm, Bruce Weirdan <weir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:01 AM Craig Francis <cr...@craigfrancis.co.uk> > wrote: > > is_literal can be used for strings because we can flag what’s > > user and what’s developer defined, and with Matthew’s request, it could > do > > integers (because an integer value alone is not inherently risky, and > it’s > > already used a lot). > > To clarify, do you imply that *all* integers are safe? Or would they > also be differentiated into literal and non-literal varieties? This would be all integers, to support the request from Matthew. I also believe, after a quick check with Joe, that it’s not possible to add a flag to an integer (“non reference counted types are stack allocated, ie the zval on either side of a call boundary are unique”). So it couldn’t work the same way. Craig
