On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 10:30 PM mickmackusa <mickmack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't see any benefit to re-adding split() to the language. Why create > more keywords for the sake of a function name with fewer characters? Code > golfing isn't a goal of the language. > > Rather, we should be going the other way and removing aliases that are not > needed such as chop(), sizeof(), join(), etc. > > Adding new function names should be done with a particular benefit in mind. > > For example, create the preg_escape() function and allow its first > parameter to be scalar or a flat array (like multiple other preg_ > functions) so that you don't have to call preg_quote() while looping an > array of terms before imploding with pipes to create a dynamic pattern. > Then the semantically misleading preg_quote() function (which doesn't > actually add quotes) can be removed and the language is left with a more > usable, more indictively named function. > > My 2 cents, > mickmackusa > Ancient history aside and forward looking; JavaScript took a huge boom in recent years and overtook PHP in areas of new adoption and code DX Making it a smoother transition for JS devs to hop back on the modern PHP train is in all our shared interest in terms of user base, and split() would help this. So why not?
