On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 6:33 PM Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 5:27 PM Arnold Daniels <
> arnold.adaniels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd like to start the discussion of the "Strict operators directive" RFC
>> version 1.5. This RFC proposes a new directive strict_
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 6:22 PM Marco Pivetta wrote:
> Hey Arnold,
>
> Perhaps it makes sense for <=> to still operate with other types, as long
> as they are uniform? Specifically:
>
> * error: 1 <=> "1"
> * ok: "a" <=> "b"
> * ok: true <=> false
>
Using `==`, `!=`, and `<=>` with string oper
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 5:27 PM Arnold Daniels
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to start the discussion of the "Strict operators directive" RFC
> version 1.5. This RFC proposes a new directive strict_operators, which
> limits the type juggling done by operators to avoid unexpected results.
>
> https:
Hey Arnold,
Perhaps it makes sense for <=> to still operate with other types, as long
as they are uniform? Specifically:
* error: 1 <=> "1"
* ok: "a" <=> "b"
* ok: true <=> false
Similar for sorting: I use <=> to differentiate multi-dimensional arrays:
perhaps it should error if the array str
