Remove implicit conversions from math types to String, to avoid accidental conversions

[Ivorforce]

• Follow-up of Add missing Color hash function #107289

We've agreed in a previous core meeting that implicit conversions should be reduced in the codebase. As a costly conversion, implicit conversion to String is especially undesirable. This PR makes one small step towards this goal.

As an example, the bug fixed by the above PR (#107289) was only possible because Color had an implicit conversion to String. This PR makes this conversion explicit (among others), preventing similar bugs from happening again in the future.

[aaronfranke]

This code looks good to me, and I agree it's a good idea to make these explicit.

[lawnjelly]

Change looks well worth making. Incidentally, I don't know if this would work too, but in a similar library recently I put all these string conversion functions into the String class rather than the classes themselves, to avoid bloating the classes with such details.

Now that it is explicit, would an alternative be a constructor on String? 🤔
I guess the choice is make the classes themselves heavier, or the String. There are probably pluses and minuses for both.

class Vector3;

class String
{
public:
	explicit String(int64_t p_value);
	explicit String(const Vector3 &p_value);
	...etc

[Ivorforce]

Now that it is explicit, would an alternative be a constructor on String? 🤔

This is possible, whether they're explicit or implicit.

The main question is which of the types the string conversion binds more tightly to. I'd say String is the more fundamental type compared to any of these math types, so it should not be including them or handling string conversions for them. But i could see other people having a different opinion about this 😄

[lawnjelly]

The main question is which of the types the string conversion binds more tightly to. I'd say String is the more fundamental type compared to any of these math types, so it should not be including them or handling string conversions for them. But i could see other people having a different opinion about this

Yeah, it's a glass half full / half empty kind of argument, and how you prefer dependencies.
Regardless the PR currently is an improvement. I just thought it worth mentioning this possibility. 👍

[Repiteo]

Thanks!