Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> Am 03.09.2020 um 09:39 schrieb Brent Roose <bre...@stitcher.io>:
>
> Hi all
>
> I want to point out the use-case when you're using CS tools, static analysers
> and IDEs: they report unused variables as errors. There are ways around those
> errors, but it's more convenient if there's language support. I'd say that
> conceptually it's also more correct: if you're not using a variable, it
> shouldn't be there.
>
These tools all work with documentation conventions already, it would be much
easier they standardise on $_ to allow being unused instead of changing the
language.
> As some of you have shown, there are ways achieve the same result without
> adding new syntax. Just like we didn't need short closures and keep using the
> normal closure syntax, like we could write if statements and didn't need the
> nullsafe operator, like we didn't need named arguments or constructor
> property promotion. I think the past years of PHP devlopment have shown that
> the majority likes convenient langague syntax and constructs, not because
> it's absolutely necessary, but because it's just a little more clean, a
> little less verbose, a bit more convenient.
>
> PHP has been maturing over the last years, which means there's room, and
> need, for things that aren't strictly necessary.
>
> Kind regards
> Brent
>
>> On 3 Sep 2020, at 09:18, Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>>> If it adds a micro-optimization, great, but allowing a developer to
>>> explicitly signal intent is the primary argument for adding void.
>>> IMO.
>>
>> You can signal intent by using $_ or $dummy or whatever. You don't need
>> new language construct each time for each way of using or not using a
>> variable.
>>
>> --
>> Stas Malyshev
>> smalys...@gmail.com
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
