Hi Larry, > I agree an associative array is the second-worst option. An inout by-ref > argument is the absolute worst. > > Normally my default position is that when in doubt, make it a structured > object with properly defined properties, and screw whatever micro-performance > hit it is, you won't notice. 99% of the time I believe that is the correct > approach. > > I can see the argument that this is the other 1%, since it's just two values, > which will basically always be wanted separately but both wanted (meaning > divmod(...)->divsor is kinda pointless), and their order should be fairly > self-evident. > > However, in that case I would urge that both the RFC and the resulting > documentation *always* use examples that return into a `[$foo, $bar]` > destructured list. Don't even suggest that people should use 0 and 1 > indexes. It's a tuple for deconstruction, that's it, if you're using it some > other way you're probably wrong. Politely ignore that it's even possible, > lest we lead people down the dark path. > > (Which means removing the current index-using example and just keeping the > pizza example.) > > --Larry Garfield
Thanks, agree. I rewrote the non-pizza example. Regards, Saki
