> > For decimal, double wouldn't be the correct type anyway, as it could > cause loss of precision. >
Sure, agree the name is imprecise. "Double" is mainly relevant to zvals. > Is there a reason PDO::PARAM_DOUBLE doesn't exist? > > I don't know if there's am historical reason. I think it should be > there, but to be honest, I'm not sure it's worth the effort at this point. Say more on why you don't think there'd be a payoff? I'd think that it would be worth taking the (I'm guessing) max. 3 days involved to add missing functionality to a widely-used extension.
