> I would tend to agree with Sara. That seems to be the only issue of contention and it is (AFAIK) reasonably straightforward to add "later" without blocking the rest of Union types. It would mean some functions wouldn't be able to get a fully accurate return type yet but... they've survived this long without them, they can wait a bit longer while this gets settled and/or some even more robust alternative is found.
Note that I'm personally alright with only bool as a type (i.e. strpos() : int|bool). I was just pointing out that introducing false alone is adding yet another inconsistency to the language, and it may not need this right now. If everything is to be voted at once, I'd suggest a split vote as follows: - vote 1: introduce union types (base proposal with bool only) : yes / no - vote 2: add false/true types: false only / false and true / no — Benjamin
