Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Hi Alessandro, I would still advise to just let this empty() construct die a natural death. If you want to change anything, you must remember that it's basically a syntactic sugar for `@!$var` For example if(empty($var)) is just if(@!$var) To change this function would require changing the rule

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Thank you, G.P.B. for editing and for sharing your honest viewpoint. I saw your corrections and already fixed some flaws in the RFC text. I raised issues that are critical on my modest viewpoint. I see languages as an optimal mix between semantics, grammar and performance. The built-in empty() fun

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 at 11:23, Alessandro Rosa wrote: > Hi Marcos, > > thanks for feedback. > Could you be clearer about your advice and gimme an example please? > I have edited the RFC content to add highlighting, hopefully you can now use that to improve the RFC text. However, I'm not very con

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Hi Marcos, thanks for feedback. Could you be clearer about your advice and gimme an example please? Alessandro Il giorno mar 31 ott 2023 alle ore 11:59 Marcos Marcolin < marcolin...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Hi Alessandro, > > It would be better to add syntax highlighting to the code examples of

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Hi Alessandro, It would be better to add syntax highlighting to the code examples of your RFC, it is not legal to read/understand the texts as if they were just texts. --- Marcos Marcolin Software Engineer | PHP www.marcosmarcolin.com.br

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Hi Mr. Tommins, thank you very much for all your very valuable advices. You can read a more robust discussion about my RFC at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_function Regards, Alessandro Rosa Il giorno lun 30 ott 2023 alle ore 23:54 Rowan Tommins < rowan.coll...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > On 30/

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

On 30/10/2023 12:24, Alessandro Rosa wrote: I have posted a new RFC at this link https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_function where I suggested some improvements to the standard built-in empty() function and provided a number of examples. Hi, and welcome! First, regarding the clarity of the pro

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

I would be voting against any function that checks for "empty". The `empty()` construct we have now should almost never be used in any reasonable code. It should be avoided at all cost. For this reason, I see no need to introduce a new variant of the same thing. I also don't believe there is any ne

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Hi there, it's a legacy function, and I don't think we can afford or we should consider this bc break. Though I don't use this function myself and also prefer other methods of input validation, still there are a lot of people that use it. Renaming this to is_empty will bring a bc break. However, th

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Thanks everybody for joining this discussion. I appreciated a lot the points you raised, as they are helping me to update and improve my rfc, whose meaning, as I hope, would look clearer than the earlier version. Improvements must be achieved, whatever they would cost. Ambiguities shall be resolv

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

> > This is exactly where the problem lies. Is a string with just whitespace > empty? Why would an ArrayObject with count 0 not be considered to be empty > while an array with count 0 is? "empty" is subjective and therefore not a > reliable function to use. Especially in legacy code I find that peo

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Thanks everybody for joining this discussion. I appreciated a lot the points you raised, as they are helping me to update and improve my rfc, whose meaning, as I hope, would look clearer than the earlier version. Alessandro Il giorno lun 30 ott 2023 alle ore 16:36 Lynn ha scritto: > On Mon, Oc

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 4:21 PM tag Knife wrote: > > > > However, according to my example, the variable is defined and has its > > value as 0 or false, and empty() returns true anyway. I confess that > > I've had some problems like this, and we chose not to use empty(), as > > sometimes 0 or fals

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

> > However, according to my example, the variable is defined and has its > value as 0 or false, and empty() returns true anyway. I confess that > I've had some problems like this, and we chose not to use empty(), as > sometimes 0 or false makes sense as a valid value. > That is exactly as the doc

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:24 PM Alessandro Rosa wrote: > Hi, > > I have posted a new RFC at this link > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_function > where I suggested some improvements to the standard built-in empty() > function and provided a number of examples. > > Thanks, > > Alessandro Rosa > WE

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Hello, I understand that the idea of ​​the RFC is about some behaviors of empty(), e.g.: ```php $var = ''; var_dump(empty($var)); // true $var= []; var_dump(empty($var)); // true $var= 0; var_dump(empty($var)); // true var_dump(empty($empty)); // true $var= true; var_dump(empty($var)); // f

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

On 30.10.2023 13:24, Alessandro Rosa wrote: Hi, I have posted a new RFC at this link https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_function where I suggested some improvements to the standard built-in empty() function and provided a number of examples. Forget about deprecating empty(). No chance I'd vote for

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function

Hi, I don't understand what you are proposing and what problem you are trying to fix. The RFC is not explaining things well.

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC about variables.

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 10:32, Глеб Жуков wrote: > Hi, my name is Gleb Zhukov. > > In my RFC I want to propose to use a new entities(abstractions), like > *objects*, *structures* and *data* instead of variables. It gives such > advatege like a mental division of different, independent entities(obj

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC about variables.

Is this a joke? pt., 25 sty 2019 o 11:32 Глеб Жуков napisał(a): > Hi, my name is Gleb Zhukov. > > In my RFC I want to propose to use a new entities(abstractions), like > *objects*, *structures* and *data* instead of variables. It gives such > advatege like a mental division of different, indepen

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC

> On 2 Aug 2016, at 09:56, Christoph Becker wrote: > For the record: there has been the "Array Of" RFC[1], but that has been > declined. It was declined because of the implementation, rather than the idea. A new proposal with a different implementation should be welcomed to be considered. Ch

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC

On 02/08/2016 09:56, Christoph Becker wrote: For the record: there has been the "Array Of" RFC[1], but that has been declined. [1] If I remember rightly, the biggest problem raised with typed arrays is that type constraints in PHP are checked dynamically eve

Re: Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC

Oh that's sad, cause it's missing feature. But what we can do. Thanks for info  Christoph. - Původní zpráva - Odesilatel: "Christoph Becker" Příjemce: "Dan Ackroyd" , "Tomáš Holan" Kopie: internals@lists.php.net Datum: 02.08.2016 10

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC

On 02.08.2016 at 09:11, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > It has been thought about, and several people are looking at an > implementation of generics: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/generics However, > it seems quite hard to implement. > > I am beginning to wonder if rather than aiming for full support of > generi

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC

On 2 August 2016 at 09:11, Dan Ackroyd wrote: > Hi Tomáš, > > It has been thought about, and several people are looking at an > implementation of generics: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/generics However, > it seems quite hard to implement. > > I am beginning to wonder if rather than aiming for full su

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC

Hi Tomáš, It has been thought about, and several people are looking at an implementation of generics: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/generics However, it seems quite hard to implement. I am beginning to wonder if rather than aiming for full support of generics listed in that RFC, instead we just aimed

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

On 14 April 2015 at 17:39, Johannes Ott wrote: > Am 14.04.2015 um 16:33 schrieb Dan Ackroyd: > >> Here is some feedback then: >> Johannes Ott wrote: > But in the new draft (v0.4) I'm preparing at the moment I'll try to > formulate the trigger "first call" more common by comparing it to the > same

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

Am 14.04.2015 um 16:33 schrieb Dan Ackroyd: > Here is some feedback then: > > From the RFC: >> - Trigger for “magic” method call: First call to class, either first call to >> __construct(...) or first call to any public or protected static method or >> property of the class > > I don't think t

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

I would rather appreciate run-time class properties initialization. Best regards, Kubo2 2015-04-13 15:37 GMT+02:00 Johannes Ott : > Hi, > > finally I managed to do my first RFC draft. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_class_constructor > > I hope I have done everything correct so far an

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

Hi Johannes, On 13 April 2015 at 13:37, Johannes Ott wrote: > Hi, > > finally I managed to do my first RFC draft. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_class_constructor > > I hope I have done everything correct so far and I'm looking forward to > your feedback on it. Here is some feedback then:

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 11:49 +0200, Johannes Ott wrote: > Am 14.04.2015 um 00:16 schrieb Levi Morrison: > >> - IMO, the method should be called when the class is created, just after > >> every parent class and implemented interfaces are created. > > > > In general I think static class data and sta

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

Am 14.04.2015 um 00:16 schrieb Levi Morrison: >> - IMO, the method should be called when the class is created, just after >> every parent class and implemented interfaces are created. > > In general I think static class data and static class constructors are > a sign of poorly designed code, whic

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

Hi, 2015-04-13 10:37 GMT-03:00 Johannes Ott : > Hi, > > finally I managed to do my first RFC draft. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_class_constructor > > I hope I have done everything correct so far and I'm looking forward to > your feedback on it. > > As I already mentioned in the prediscussi

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

On Mon, 2015-04-13 at 21:14 +0200, Johannes Ott wrote: > The obvious task is to initial the state of the class before usage as I > wrote inside my introduction of the RFC. That is one possible task users are going to try doing. Users are more creative. > I think there is no "random" behavior (not

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Johannes Ott wrote: > Hi, > > finally I managed to do my first RFC draft. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_class_constructor > > I hope I have done everything correct so far and I'm looking forward to > your feedback on it. The static constructor cannot be call

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

> - IMO, the method should be called when the class is created, just after > every parent class and implemented interfaces are created. In general I think static class data and static class constructors are a sign of poorly designed code, which means I am against this feature. If it does make it

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

> Okay I will think about the alternative names, I somehow like > __classInit you proposed or __classConstruct I like simple: __init() -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

Am 13.04.2015 um 18:54 schrieb Johannes Schlüter: > On Mon, 2015-04-13 at 17:23 +0200, Johannes Schlüter wrote: >> Why am I saying it makes the language more complex? - Your proposal >> seems to miss mentioning when exactly the method is executed. what is > > Ah, I missed this > > Trigger

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

On Mon, 2015-04-13 at 17:23 +0200, Johannes Schlüter wrote: > Why am I saying it makes the language more complex? - Your proposal > seems to miss mentioning when exactly the method is executed. what is Ah, I missed this Trigger for “magic” method call: First call to class, either

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

Am 13.04.2015 um 18:02 schrieb François Laupretre: >> De : Johannes Ott [mailto:m...@deroetzi.de] >> finally I managed to do my first RFC draft. >> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_class_constructor >> >> I hope I have done everything correct so far and I'm looking forward to >> your feedback on

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

Am 13.04.2015 um 17:29 schrieb Benjamin Eberlei: > What would happen if you "call the parent constructor": > > class A extends B { >static public function __static() { > B::__static(); >} > } > Please have a closer look to the definition of the function: https://wiki.php.net/rfc

RE: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

> De : Johannes Ott [mailto:m...@deroetzi.de] > finally I managed to do my first RFC draft. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_class_constructor > > I hope I have done everything correct so far and I'm looking forward to > your feedback on it. Interesting. It also allows to respect PSR-1, which

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

What would happen if you "call the parent constructor": class A extends B { static public function __static() { B::__static(); } } On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Johannes Schlüter wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2015-04-13 at 15:37 +0200, Johannes Ott wrote: > > finally I managed to do

Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC draft "static class constructor"

Hi, On Mon, 2015-04-13 at 15:37 +0200, Johannes Ott wrote: > finally I managed to do my first RFC draft. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/static_class_constructor > > I hope I have done everything correct so far and I'm looking forward to > your feedback on it. In my opinion this makes the language