On Saturday, July 9, 2022, Kirill Nesmeyanov <n...@xakep.ru> wrote: > > Note that the "..." operator is unary, so there is no syntax conflict when > using two floats: > ``` > echo 0...1; // 00.1 > ``` > > However, in the case of the ".." operator, it is assumed to be a binary > operator, so problems with grammar ambiguity may arise: > ``` > echo 0 ..1; // 00.1 > echo 0.. 1; // 01 > ``` > > * Note: The syntax you suggest is widely used in at least Ruby ( > https://ruby-doc.org/core-2.5.1/Range.html ) and CoffeeScript. > * Note: There is also a `trim`, `ltrim` and `rtrim` functions > > >Суббота, 9 июля 2022, 2:56 +03:00 от mickmackusa <mickmack...@gmail.com>: > > > >I've discovered that several native string functions offer a character > mask > >as a parameter. > > > >I've laid out my observations at > >https://stackoverflow.com/q/72865138/2943403 > > > >In a nutshell, not all character masks offer ranges via "double dot" > >syntax. Or should I refer to ".." as the "string spread operator" to avoid > >naming conflict with "..." -- the better known "spread operator" (array > >spread operator)? > > > >Rowan/@IMSoP informed me that the current division between the haves and > >the have-nots appears to be based on the source language from which PHP > >pulled. Essentially, if from C, the double dot does not represent a range. > >https://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/11?m=54864842#54864842 > > > >Character ranges are not yet supported for: > >- strcspn() > >- strpbrk() > >- strspn() > > > >Before I fire off an RFC, I would like to know: > > > >1. Are there any reasonable objections to consistently implementing > >character range expressions for all character masks? > >2. Are there any native functions that I did not mention my Stack Overflow > >answer? > >3. Is it true that only single-byte characters can be used in all > >scenarios? If so, must it remain that way? > >4. Is there already an official or widely-used term that I should be using > >for the two-dot operator? > > > >I should also mention that I initially considered requesting that all > >character mask parameters be named $mask (instead of $separators, $token, > >or $characters), but I later resigned to the fact that changing to a name > >that describes the texture of the string would remove the more > >vital/intuitive purpose of the string. I suppose the best that can be done > >to inform developers is to explicitly mention in the documentation when > >character range expressions are implemented and demonstrate their usage in > >an example (not just as a user comment at the bottom; this isn't In-N-Out > >Burger -- put your offerings on the frickin' menu!). > > > >mickmackusa > > > -- > Kirill Nesmeyanov >
Thanks for your reply, Kirill, but I am no way trying to introduce a new, general use operator for all encountered strings. I am purely focused on having the operator consistently implemented for all character masks. The language construct `echo` does not have a specified character mask parameter. mickmackusa
