Re: [RFC] Add "is_representable_as_float()" and "is_representable_as_int()" functions

> Since frameworks already have things like Strings::is_stringable() and Arr::arrayable(), > I'd suggest to use is_floatable(), is_intable() or is_integerable(), etc. > To me, this would also feel more consistent is is_float(), is_int(), etc. I get what you mean. Naming is definitely challenging here. However, with alternatives like "is_floatable()", I'm afraid that it is not clear enough that there's a potential loss of precision. I would personally feel that "is_floatable()" would mean "can this be cast to float?" without further "limitation". Best, Alexandre Daubois