On Thu, Sep 3, 2020, at 3:25 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 10:19 AM Dik Takken <dik.tak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 03-09-2020 09:38, Brent Roose wrote: > > > 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. > > > > Exactly this. > > > > The intent of a particular language construct does not only need to be > > clear to human readers but also to machines. More explicit intent leads > > to stronger static code analysis tools, which helps us catch more bugs > > earlier. > > > > Regards, > > Dik Takken > > > > Static analysis tools don't need a language feature to support this. They > can recognize the $_ pattern and not emit an unused variable warning for > it. I'd suggest submitting a feature request. > > Nikita
I agree here. _ is already a common pattern in other languages for a placeholder ignored variable. It's not a big jump for PHP static analyzers to start ignoring unused $_ variables, and it requires no language changes or formal standards. I am skeptical of any performance difference, but from a reader-communication point of view a de facto convention of $_ == unused, and analyzers recognizing that, seems like the path of least resistance. --Larry Garfield -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
