This is a little tangent from the Enums RFC, but I want to flag it because it it's the sort of in-passing decision that could have far-reaching implications, so shouldn't be done implicitly.
At the moment, the Enum RFC for scalar enums includes two methods: public function has(string $name): bool public function from(string $name): self throws ValueError Nikita raised the point that has() seems kinda pointless as it would only ever be used to wrap a possibly-unsafe from() call. (In most other cases, calling cases() would be more useful or at least equally useful.) One of the proposed alternatives was the following: public function from(string $name): self throws ValueError public function tryFrom(string $name): ?self The "a method that begins with try is nullable, so watch out" idiom is present in C# and Rust, but to my knowledge has never existed in PHP. That doesn't make it bad; it actually combines quite well with the null coalesce operator to allow for default values, making a valueOrDefault() method unnecessary. $order = SortOrder::tryFrom($input) ?? SortOrder::Asc; I'm not opposed to following that pattern here; it would allow both a "hard fail" and "soft fail" variant of the operation. However, as noted that idiom has never appeared in PHP before that I'm aware. If we adopt it here, that means it will either start to spread and become a more common PHP idiom over time, OR it won't spread and Enums will have this weird one-off naming convention for a nullable method. The former would, of course, be considerably preferable to the latter. So, explicit decision time: Are we OK with introducing that idiom, and then following it consistently in the future in similar situations? (viz, tryX() means nullable, and no-try means not nullable.) I'm good with it if the consensus is good with it, but I want to see what the consensus is first. -- Larry Garfield la...@garfieldtech.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
