Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: craig at clearbooks dot co dot uk
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
+1 for this language construct it would be awesome
Previous Comments:
[2013-05-16 20:02:39] charlie at gorichanaz dot com
Well, I maintain I would love to see this control structure implemented. I
understand a non English speaker might not have the same level of understanding
of the word unless as a native English speaker, but you can say the same of
any other keyword in PHP or any other programming language written in English,
and I fail to see how that is a valid argument against its inclusion.
[2013-02-20 18:36:04] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
It looks like this conversation dried up after the rather out-of-context
confusion
over unless somehow meaning more.
Can we move past that please, as it's a ridiculous non-issue.
[2012-07-30 15:09:00] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Rasmus: toby was not suggesting that uniqid is the opposite of iqid, he is
saying that you can have un at the start of a function or keyword without it
automatically flipping the meaning of the next few letters and confusing people
-
as you suggested in your comment yesterday.
In neither situation does un switch the meaning of the following letters, so
if
it is ok for one function/keyword it should be ok for another, right?
I don't want to argue, I just want to make sure people are clear. I would hate
to
see this conversation derailed by confusion or people loudly agreeing.
[2012-07-30 15:00:31] ras...@php.net
Now you are just being silly. uniqid is unique id from the latin root uni
meaning one or singular. Makes perfect sense . It isn't un anything.
[2012-07-30 13:19:47] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
FWIW, while Perl does allow
unless (foo) { bar }
else { baz }
I've never seen it in the wild. I've only ever seen unless used without any
trailing else conditions. (And although Perl syntax allows else following
unless, it explicitly disallows elsif following unless.) I'd be perfectly happy
for PHP to forbid both elseif and else after unless.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages
Latin had nisi. Modern languages derived from Latin are all the poorer for
having lost this concept.
It is an odd word that essentially means not-if even though
it logically should be equivalent to more as in the
opposite of more would be less and sticking un in
front of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
By that logic, uniqid() should return the opposite of the iqid() function.
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: freshtuneage at gmail dot com
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
Ha ha, PHP lusers. We don't want this feature because it is too
complicated for our training wheel-restricted users. What a
bunch of simplistic dolts. When you're ready to move forward into
the brave new world of the 1990's, let the rest of us know.
Previous Comments:
[2013-02-20 18:36:04] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
It looks like this conversation dried up after the rather out-of-context
confusion
over unless somehow meaning more.
Can we move past that please, as it's a ridiculous non-issue.
[2012-07-30 15:09:00] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Rasmus: toby was not suggesting that uniqid is the opposite of iqid, he is
saying that you can have un at the start of a function or keyword without it
automatically flipping the meaning of the next few letters and confusing people
-
as you suggested in your comment yesterday.
In neither situation does un switch the meaning of the following letters, so
if
it is ok for one function/keyword it should be ok for another, right?
I don't want to argue, I just want to make sure people are clear. I would hate
to
see this conversation derailed by confusion or people loudly agreeing.
[2012-07-30 15:00:31] ras...@php.net
Now you are just being silly. uniqid is unique id from the latin root uni
meaning one or singular. Makes perfect sense . It isn't un anything.
[2012-07-30 13:19:47] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
FWIW, while Perl does allow
unless (foo) { bar }
else { baz }
I've never seen it in the wild. I've only ever seen unless used without any
trailing else conditions. (And although Perl syntax allows else following
unless, it explicitly disallows elsif following unless.) I'd be perfectly happy
for PHP to forbid both elseif and else after unless.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages
Latin had nisi. Modern languages derived from Latin are all the poorer for
having lost this concept.
It is an odd word that essentially means not-if even though
it logically should be equivalent to more as in the
opposite of more would be less and sticking un in
front of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
By that logic, uniqid() should return the opposite of the iqid() function.
[2012-07-29 21:42:28] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
In regards to double negatives, I agree. If I see a developer do this unless a
!=
7 then I would block their PR and instantly go and have a talk with them about
writing sane code.
As for else it really shouldn't be used that much but it should be possible.
unless (foo === 'bar') {
// do something
}
else {
// do something else
}
Is that really a confusion?
Unlesselse might become a dog though, not sure about that:
unless (foo === 'bar') {
// do something
}
unlesselse (foo === 'baz') {
// do something
}
else {
// do something else
}
At that point you'd just want to be using a switch, but that is the same for
if's.
As I said unless should not really use an else, otherwise you'd be better off
just
using an if and swapping it around, but having it doesn't hurt.
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: charlie at gorichanaz dot com
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
Well, I maintain I would love to see this control structure implemented. I
understand a non English speaker might not have the same level of understanding
of the word unless as a native English speaker, but you can say the same of
any other keyword in PHP or any other programming language written in English,
and I fail to see how that is a valid argument against its inclusion.
Previous Comments:
[2013-05-16 19:45:59] freshtuneage at gmail dot com
Ha ha, PHP lusers. We don't want this feature because it is too
complicated for our training wheel-restricted users. What a
bunch of simplistic dolts. When you're ready to move forward into
the brave new world of the 1990's, let the rest of us know.
[2013-02-20 18:36:04] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
It looks like this conversation dried up after the rather out-of-context
confusion
over unless somehow meaning more.
Can we move past that please, as it's a ridiculous non-issue.
[2012-07-30 15:09:00] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Rasmus: toby was not suggesting that uniqid is the opposite of iqid, he is
saying that you can have un at the start of a function or keyword without it
automatically flipping the meaning of the next few letters and confusing people
-
as you suggested in your comment yesterday.
In neither situation does un switch the meaning of the following letters, so
if
it is ok for one function/keyword it should be ok for another, right?
I don't want to argue, I just want to make sure people are clear. I would hate
to
see this conversation derailed by confusion or people loudly agreeing.
[2012-07-30 15:00:31] ras...@php.net
Now you are just being silly. uniqid is unique id from the latin root uni
meaning one or singular. Makes perfect sense . It isn't un anything.
[2012-07-30 13:19:47] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
FWIW, while Perl does allow
unless (foo) { bar }
else { baz }
I've never seen it in the wild. I've only ever seen unless used without any
trailing else conditions. (And although Perl syntax allows else following
unless, it explicitly disallows elsif following unless.) I'd be perfectly happy
for PHP to forbid both elseif and else after unless.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages
Latin had nisi. Modern languages derived from Latin are all the poorer for
having lost this concept.
It is an odd word that essentially means not-if even though
it logically should be equivalent to more as in the
opposite of more would be less and sticking un in
front of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
By that logic, uniqid() should return the opposite of the iqid() function.
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
It looks like this conversation dried up after the rather out-of-context
confusion
over unless somehow meaning more.
Can we move past that please, as it's a ridiculous non-issue.
Previous Comments:
[2012-07-30 15:09:00] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Rasmus: toby was not suggesting that uniqid is the opposite of iqid, he is
saying that you can have un at the start of a function or keyword without it
automatically flipping the meaning of the next few letters and confusing people
-
as you suggested in your comment yesterday.
In neither situation does un switch the meaning of the following letters, so
if
it is ok for one function/keyword it should be ok for another, right?
I don't want to argue, I just want to make sure people are clear. I would hate
to
see this conversation derailed by confusion or people loudly agreeing.
[2012-07-30 15:00:31] ras...@php.net
Now you are just being silly. uniqid is unique id from the latin root uni
meaning one or singular. Makes perfect sense . It isn't un anything.
[2012-07-30 13:19:47] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
FWIW, while Perl does allow
unless (foo) { bar }
else { baz }
I've never seen it in the wild. I've only ever seen unless used without any
trailing else conditions. (And although Perl syntax allows else following
unless, it explicitly disallows elsif following unless.) I'd be perfectly happy
for PHP to forbid both elseif and else after unless.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages
Latin had nisi. Modern languages derived from Latin are all the poorer for
having lost this concept.
It is an odd word that essentially means not-if even though
it logically should be equivalent to more as in the
opposite of more would be less and sticking un in
front of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
By that logic, uniqid() should return the opposite of the iqid() function.
[2012-07-29 21:42:28] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
In regards to double negatives, I agree. If I see a developer do this unless a
!=
7 then I would block their PR and instantly go and have a talk with them about
writing sane code.
As for else it really shouldn't be used that much but it should be possible.
unless (foo === 'bar') {
// do something
}
else {
// do something else
}
Is that really a confusion?
Unlesselse might become a dog though, not sure about that:
unless (foo === 'bar') {
// do something
}
unlesselse (foo === 'baz') {
// do something
}
else {
// do something else
}
At that point you'd just want to be using a switch, but that is the same for
if's.
As I said unless should not really use an else, otherwise you'd be better off
just
using an if and swapping it around, but having it doesn't hurt.
[2012-07-29 21:35:45] kinghfb+php at gmail dot com
The structure adds sugar without necessarily breaking anything (with the
exception of existing unless() functions, as Rasmus mentioned). I really don't
think the double-negatives argument works here, as we're already doing that
with 'if', meaning that the readability is quite low in some cases.
My only concern is that the structure seems to be more easily convoluted than
'if', potentially leading to nightmarish comprehension tasks.
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
Rasmus: toby was not suggesting that uniqid is the opposite of iqid, he is
saying that you can have un at the start of a function or keyword without it
automatically flipping the meaning of the next few letters and confusing people
-
as you suggested in your comment yesterday.
In neither situation does un switch the meaning of the following letters, so
if
it is ok for one function/keyword it should be ok for another, right?
I don't want to argue, I just want to make sure people are clear. I would hate
to
see this conversation derailed by confusion or people loudly agreeing.
Previous Comments:
[2012-07-30 15:00:31] ras...@php.net
Now you are just being silly. uniqid is unique id from the latin root uni
meaning one or singular. Makes perfect sense . It isn't un anything.
[2012-07-30 13:19:47] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
FWIW, while Perl does allow
unless (foo) { bar }
else { baz }
I've never seen it in the wild. I've only ever seen unless used without any
trailing else conditions. (And although Perl syntax allows else following
unless, it explicitly disallows elsif following unless.) I'd be perfectly happy
for PHP to forbid both elseif and else after unless.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages
Latin had nisi. Modern languages derived from Latin are all the poorer for
having lost this concept.
It is an odd word that essentially means not-if even though
it logically should be equivalent to more as in the
opposite of more would be less and sticking un in
front of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
By that logic, uniqid() should return the opposite of the iqid() function.
[2012-07-29 21:42:28] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
In regards to double negatives, I agree. If I see a developer do this unless a
!=
7 then I would block their PR and instantly go and have a talk with them about
writing sane code.
As for else it really shouldn't be used that much but it should be possible.
unless (foo === 'bar') {
// do something
}
else {
// do something else
}
Is that really a confusion?
Unlesselse might become a dog though, not sure about that:
unless (foo === 'bar') {
// do something
}
unlesselse (foo === 'baz') {
// do something
}
else {
// do something else
}
At that point you'd just want to be using a switch, but that is the same for
if's.
As I said unless should not really use an else, otherwise you'd be better off
just
using an if and swapping it around, but having it doesn't hurt.
[2012-07-29 21:35:45] kinghfb+php at gmail dot com
The structure adds sugar without necessarily breaking anything (with the
exception of existing unless() functions, as Rasmus mentioned). I really don't
think the double-negatives argument works here, as we're already doing that
with 'if', meaning that the readability is quite low in some cases.
My only concern is that the structure seems to be more easily convoluted than
'if', potentially leading to nightmarish comprehension tasks.
[2012-07-29 20:36:46] hi at brennannovak dot com
I like this idea quite a bit- of course I am a native english speaker as well
(American), but considering this is used in Ruby Python the language barrier
is
not too great that it hinders use. Additionally there are *many* abbreviations
in
PHP that consist of multiple english words which developers are able to
understand such as strcmp()
Once I memorize what a group of characters *do* I stop thinking about the words
that make up the function.
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Open
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:Feature/Change Request
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
I am surprised to see such a lack of interest on this feature request.
Ruby and Perl both have unless, and while that is certainly not a reason on
its
own, it does show that this is used.
There are two people here saying that unless is confusing. How so? If something
matches false then do whatever. It has an else too, so if something is true it
will be used.
The main point here is not to remove a single !, but to make much cleaner
syntax.
if ( ! (isset($foo) or ($foo !== 'bar')) exit('invalid value');
or
unless (isset($foo) and $foo === 'bar') exit('invalid value');
Its a minor difference as I cannot remember a more compelling example, but
there
have been numerous times I have wished to reverse this and have unless instead
of
an extremely complex if statement.
Unless just makes sense, it's optional, it doesn't break BC, it makes syntax
easier to read in some situations and it is easy to document. If I knew enough
C
I'd send in a patch right now as PHP would be better off for having this.
Previous Comments:
[2011-12-30 13:50:47] joke at nakhon dot net
I vote against this request. Both perl and ruby's 'unless' confuse me so much.
It can be easy to abuse.
I often encounter someone wrote code like this:
unless a != 7
b = 3
else
b = 6
end
[2011-08-04 20:59:24] achaia3 at gmail dot com
This would be a convenient feature for sure with no down sides for anybody not
wishing to use it.
[2011-06-05 22:47:45] mattr dot smith at gmail dot com
I also request this feature.
Ruby has this structure too and really adds to the readability of code.
I don't see any argument at against this that is valid other than the fact that
PHP programmers don't want to change.
[2007-12-31 23:19:51] michael at chunkycow dot com dot au
G'day
Perl has lots of 'features' in it, although I cannot see how an
'unless' control structure adds to anything but confusion for existing/new
developers.
[2007-01-31 12:26:42] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Description:
It would be nice if PHP had an unless control structure so that:
unless (...) { ... }
would be equivalent to:
if (!(...)) { ... }
Although the unless control structure is actually slightly more verbose (in
bytes) than if, it is arguably a lot more readable in the following examples:
unless ($a==0 || $b==0)
divide_by($a*$b);
versus:
if (!($a==0 || $b==0))
divide_by($a*$b);
or, equivalently using De Morgan's Law (Google for it):
if ($a!=0 $b!=0)
divide_by($a*$b);
The unless structure uses less punctuation, and more human syntax. I can't
imagine how this extra syntax would break any existing scripts.
For what it's worth, Perl already has an unless control structure.
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
Thanks for stopping by Rasmus, that was a really quick follow up.
I think you might have pointed out the crux of the confusion: being a native
English speaker. To me it makes perfect sense, but I am British.
Unless the condition is true, do this.
I like the post: https://37signals.com/svn/posts/2699-making-sense-with-rubys-
unless
A new keyword just to replace if ( ! (condition)) might seem like a hassle,
and
the objective of the game is not always to make PHP nice, but it is readable
and
logical to many, and is easy to ignore if you don't like it - unless you have
function unless(), but the chances are that function is doing something similar
anyway.
Previous Comments:
[2012-07-29 20:16:53] ras...@php.net
Any new keyword breaks BC to some extent because it will break any code that
has
an existing unless() function. I agree with others here that unless() can be
quite confusing. A negated conditional keyword lends itself to double negatives.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages and definitely not
obvious to non-native English speaking people like myself. It is an odd word
that essentially means not-if even though it logically should be equivalent to
more as in the opposite of more would be less and sticking un in front
of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
[2012-07-29 20:00:40] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
I am surprised to see such a lack of interest on this feature request.
Ruby and Perl both have unless, and while that is certainly not a reason on
its
own, it does show that this is used.
There are two people here saying that unless is confusing. How so? If something
matches false then do whatever. It has an else too, so if something is true it
will be used.
The main point here is not to remove a single !, but to make much cleaner
syntax.
if ( ! (isset($foo) or ($foo !== 'bar')) exit('invalid value');
or
unless (isset($foo) and $foo === 'bar') exit('invalid value');
Its a minor difference as I cannot remember a more compelling example, but
there
have been numerous times I have wished to reverse this and have unless instead
of
an extremely complex if statement.
Unless just makes sense, it's optional, it doesn't break BC, it makes syntax
easier to read in some situations and it is easy to document. If I knew enough
C
I'd send in a patch right now as PHP would be better off for having this.
[2011-12-30 13:50:47] joke at nakhon dot net
I vote against this request. Both perl and ruby's 'unless' confuse me so much.
It can be easy to abuse.
I often encounter someone wrote code like this:
unless a != 7
b = 3
else
b = 6
end
[2011-08-04 20:59:24] achaia3 at gmail dot com
This would be a convenient feature for sure with no down sides for anybody not
wishing to use it.
[2011-06-05 22:47:45] mattr dot smith at gmail dot com
I also request this feature.
Ruby has this structure too and really adds to the readability of code.
I don't see any argument at against this that is valid other than the fact that
PHP programmers don't want to change.
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: hi at brennannovak dot com
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
I like this idea quite a bit- of course I am a native english speaker as well
(American), but considering this is used in Ruby Python the language barrier
is
not too great that it hinders use. Additionally there are *many* abbreviations
in
PHP that consist of multiple english words which developers are able to
understand such as strcmp()
Once I memorize what a group of characters *do* I stop thinking about the words
that make up the function.
Previous Comments:
[2012-07-29 20:25:43] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Thanks for stopping by Rasmus, that was a really quick follow up.
I think you might have pointed out the crux of the confusion: being a native
English speaker. To me it makes perfect sense, but I am British.
Unless the condition is true, do this.
I like the post: https://37signals.com/svn/posts/2699-making-sense-with-rubys-
unless
A new keyword just to replace if ( ! (condition)) might seem like a hassle,
and
the objective of the game is not always to make PHP nice, but it is readable
and
logical to many, and is easy to ignore if you don't like it - unless you have
function unless(), but the chances are that function is doing something similar
anyway.
[2012-07-29 20:16:53] ras...@php.net
Any new keyword breaks BC to some extent because it will break any code that
has
an existing unless() function. I agree with others here that unless() can be
quite confusing. A negated conditional keyword lends itself to double negatives.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages and definitely not
obvious to non-native English speaking people like myself. It is an odd word
that essentially means not-if even though it logically should be equivalent to
more as in the opposite of more would be less and sticking un in front
of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
[2012-07-29 20:00:40] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
I am surprised to see such a lack of interest on this feature request.
Ruby and Perl both have unless, and while that is certainly not a reason on
its
own, it does show that this is used.
There are two people here saying that unless is confusing. How so? If something
matches false then do whatever. It has an else too, so if something is true it
will be used.
The main point here is not to remove a single !, but to make much cleaner
syntax.
if ( ! (isset($foo) or ($foo !== 'bar')) exit('invalid value');
or
unless (isset($foo) and $foo === 'bar') exit('invalid value');
Its a minor difference as I cannot remember a more compelling example, but
there
have been numerous times I have wished to reverse this and have unless instead
of
an extremely complex if statement.
Unless just makes sense, it's optional, it doesn't break BC, it makes syntax
easier to read in some situations and it is easy to document. If I knew enough
C
I'd send in a patch right now as PHP would be better off for having this.
[2011-12-30 13:50:47] joke at nakhon dot net
I vote against this request. Both perl and ruby's 'unless' confuse me so much.
It can be easy to abuse.
I often encounter someone wrote code like this:
unless a != 7
b = 3
else
b = 6
end
[2011-08-04 20:59:24] achaia3 at gmail dot com
This would be a convenient feature for sure with no down sides for anybody not
wishing to use it.
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: kinghfb+php at gmail dot com
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
The structure adds sugar without necessarily breaking anything (with the
exception of existing unless() functions, as Rasmus mentioned). I really don't
think the double-negatives argument works here, as we're already doing that
with 'if', meaning that the readability is quite low in some cases.
My only concern is that the structure seems to be more easily convoluted than
'if', potentially leading to nightmarish comprehension tasks.
Previous Comments:
[2012-07-29 20:36:46] hi at brennannovak dot com
I like this idea quite a bit- of course I am a native english speaker as well
(American), but considering this is used in Ruby Python the language barrier
is
not too great that it hinders use. Additionally there are *many* abbreviations
in
PHP that consist of multiple english words which developers are able to
understand such as strcmp()
Once I memorize what a group of characters *do* I stop thinking about the words
that make up the function.
[2012-07-29 20:25:43] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Thanks for stopping by Rasmus, that was a really quick follow up.
I think you might have pointed out the crux of the confusion: being a native
English speaker. To me it makes perfect sense, but I am British.
Unless the condition is true, do this.
I like the post: https://37signals.com/svn/posts/2699-making-sense-with-rubys-
unless
A new keyword just to replace if ( ! (condition)) might seem like a hassle,
and
the objective of the game is not always to make PHP nice, but it is readable
and
logical to many, and is easy to ignore if you don't like it - unless you have
function unless(), but the chances are that function is doing something similar
anyway.
[2012-07-29 20:16:53] ras...@php.net
Any new keyword breaks BC to some extent because it will break any code that
has
an existing unless() function. I agree with others here that unless() can be
quite confusing. A negated conditional keyword lends itself to double negatives.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages and definitely not
obvious to non-native English speaking people like myself. It is an odd word
that essentially means not-if even though it logically should be equivalent to
more as in the opposite of more would be less and sticking un in front
of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
[2012-07-29 20:00:40] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
I am surprised to see such a lack of interest on this feature request.
Ruby and Perl both have unless, and while that is certainly not a reason on
its
own, it does show that this is used.
There are two people here saying that unless is confusing. How so? If something
matches false then do whatever. It has an else too, so if something is true it
will be used.
The main point here is not to remove a single !, but to make much cleaner
syntax.
if ( ! (isset($foo) or ($foo !== 'bar')) exit('invalid value');
or
unless (isset($foo) and $foo === 'bar') exit('invalid value');
Its a minor difference as I cannot remember a more compelling example, but
there
have been numerous times I have wished to reverse this and have unless instead
of
an extremely complex if statement.
Unless just makes sense, it's optional, it doesn't break BC, it makes syntax
easier to read in some situations and it is easy to document. If I knew enough
C
I'd send in a patch right now as PHP would be better off for having this.
[2011-12-30 13:50:47] joke at nakhon dot net
I vote against this request. Both perl and ruby's 'unless' confuse me so much.
It can be easy to abuse.
I often encounter someone wrote code like this:
unless a != 7
b = 3
else
b = 6
end
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Wont fix
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:*General Issues
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
In regards to double negatives, I agree. If I see a developer do this unless a
!=
7 then I would block their PR and instantly go and have a talk with them about
writing sane code.
As for else it really shouldn't be used that much but it should be possible.
unless (foo === 'bar') {
// do something
}
else {
// do something else
}
Is that really a confusion?
Unlesselse might become a dog though, not sure about that:
unless (foo === 'bar') {
// do something
}
unlesselse (foo === 'baz') {
// do something
}
else {
// do something else
}
At that point you'd just want to be using a switch, but that is the same for
if's.
As I said unless should not really use an else, otherwise you'd be better off
just
using an if and swapping it around, but having it doesn't hurt.
Previous Comments:
[2012-07-29 21:35:45] kinghfb+php at gmail dot com
The structure adds sugar without necessarily breaking anything (with the
exception of existing unless() functions, as Rasmus mentioned). I really don't
think the double-negatives argument works here, as we're already doing that
with 'if', meaning that the readability is quite low in some cases.
My only concern is that the structure seems to be more easily convoluted than
'if', potentially leading to nightmarish comprehension tasks.
[2012-07-29 20:36:46] hi at brennannovak dot com
I like this idea quite a bit- of course I am a native english speaker as well
(American), but considering this is used in Ruby Python the language barrier
is
not too great that it hinders use. Additionally there are *many* abbreviations
in
PHP that consist of multiple english words which developers are able to
understand such as strcmp()
Once I memorize what a group of characters *do* I stop thinking about the words
that make up the function.
[2012-07-29 20:25:43] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
Thanks for stopping by Rasmus, that was a really quick follow up.
I think you might have pointed out the crux of the confusion: being a native
English speaker. To me it makes perfect sense, but I am British.
Unless the condition is true, do this.
I like the post: https://37signals.com/svn/posts/2699-making-sense-with-rubys-
unless
A new keyword just to replace if ( ! (condition)) might seem like a hassle,
and
the objective of the game is not always to make PHP nice, but it is readable
and
logical to many, and is easy to ignore if you don't like it - unless you have
function unless(), but the chances are that function is doing something similar
anyway.
[2012-07-29 20:16:53] ras...@php.net
Any new keyword breaks BC to some extent because it will break any code that
has
an existing unless() function. I agree with others here that unless() can be
quite confusing. A negated conditional keyword lends itself to double negatives.
It also isn't a very common feature in other languages and definitely not
obvious to non-native English speaking people like myself. It is an odd word
that essentially means not-if even though it logically should be equivalent to
more as in the opposite of more would be less and sticking un in front
of it suddenly completely changes the meaning entirely.
[2012-07-29 20:00:40] email at philsturgeon dot co dot uk
I am surprised to see such a lack of interest on this feature request.
Ruby and Perl both have unless, and while that is certainly not a reason on
its
own, it does show that this is used.
There are two people here saying that unless is confusing. How so? If something
matches false then do whatever. It has an else too, so if something is true it
will be used.
The main point here is not to remove a single !, but to make much cleaner
syntax.
if ( ! (isset($foo) or ($foo !== 'bar')) exit('invalid value');
or
unless (isset($foo) and $foo === 'bar') exit('invalid value');
Its a minor difference as I cannot remember a more compelling example, but
there
have been numerous times I have wished to reverse this and have unless instead
of
an extremely complex if statement.
Unless just makes sense, it's optional, it doesn't break BC, it makes syntax
easier to read in some situations and
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: joke at nakhon dot net
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Open
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:Feature/Change Request
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
I vote against this request. Both perl and ruby's 'unless' confuse me so much.
It can be easy to abuse.
I often encounter someone wrote code like this:
unless a != 7
b = 3
else
b = 6
end
Previous Comments:
[2011-08-04 20:59:24] achaia3 at gmail dot com
This would be a convenient feature for sure with no down sides for anybody not
wishing to use it.
[2011-06-05 22:47:45] mattr dot smith at gmail dot com
I also request this feature.
Ruby has this structure too and really adds to the readability of code.
I don't see any argument at against this that is valid other than the fact that
PHP programmers don't want to change.
[2007-12-31 23:19:51] michael at chunkycow dot com dot au
G'day
Perl has lots of 'features' in it, although I cannot see how an
'unless' control structure adds to anything but confusion for existing/new
developers.
[2007-01-31 12:26:42] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Description:
It would be nice if PHP had an unless control structure so that:
unless (...) { ... }
would be equivalent to:
if (!(...)) { ... }
Although the unless control structure is actually slightly more verbose (in
bytes) than if, it is arguably a lot more readable in the following examples:
unless ($a==0 || $b==0)
divide_by($a*$b);
versus:
if (!($a==0 || $b==0))
divide_by($a*$b);
or, equivalently using De Morgan's Law (Google for it):
if ($a!=0 $b!=0)
divide_by($a*$b);
The unless structure uses less punctuation, and more human syntax. I can't
imagine how this extra syntax would break any existing scripts.
For what it's worth, Perl already has an unless control structure.
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: achaia3 at gmail dot com
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Open
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:Feature/Change Request
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
This would be a convenient feature for sure with no down sides for anybody not
wishing to use it.
Previous Comments:
[2011-06-05 22:47:45] mattr dot smith at gmail dot com
I also request this feature.
Ruby has this structure too and really adds to the readability of code.
I don't see any argument at against this that is valid other than the fact that
PHP programmers don't want to change.
[2007-12-31 23:19:51] michael at chunkycow dot com dot au
G'day
Perl has lots of 'features' in it, although I cannot see how an
'unless' control structure adds to anything but confusion for existing/new
developers.
[2007-01-31 12:26:42] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Description:
It would be nice if PHP had an unless control structure so that:
unless (...) { ... }
would be equivalent to:
if (!(...)) { ... }
Although the unless control structure is actually slightly more verbose (in
bytes) than if, it is arguably a lot more readable in the following examples:
unless ($a==0 || $b==0)
divide_by($a*$b);
versus:
if (!($a==0 || $b==0))
divide_by($a*$b);
or, equivalently using De Morgan's Law (Google for it):
if ($a!=0 $b!=0)
divide_by($a*$b);
The unless structure uses less punctuation, and more human syntax. I can't
imagine how this extra syntax would break any existing scripts.
For what it's worth, Perl already has an unless control structure.
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
Req #40296 [Com]: unless control structure
Edit report at http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
ID: 40296
Comment by: mattr dot smith at gmail dot com
Reported by:mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Summary:unless control structure
Status: Open
Type: Feature/Change Request
Package:Feature/Change Request
Operating System: All
PHP Version:5.2.0
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
I also request this feature.
Ruby has this structure too and really adds to the readability of code.
I don't see any argument at against this that is valid other than the fact that
PHP programmers don't want to change.
Previous Comments:
[2007-12-31 23:19:51] michael at chunkycow dot com dot au
G'day
Perl has lots of 'features' in it, although I cannot see how an
'unless' control structure adds to anything but confusion for existing/new
developers.
[2007-01-31 12:26:42] mail at tobyinkster dot co dot uk
Description:
It would be nice if PHP had an unless control structure so that:
unless (...) { ... }
would be equivalent to:
if (!(...)) { ... }
Although the unless control structure is actually slightly more verbose (in
bytes) than if, it is arguably a lot more readable in the following examples:
unless ($a==0 || $b==0)
divide_by($a*$b);
versus:
if (!($a==0 || $b==0))
divide_by($a*$b);
or, equivalently using De Morgan's Law (Google for it):
if ($a!=0 $b!=0)
divide_by($a*$b);
The unless structure uses less punctuation, and more human syntax. I can't
imagine how this extra syntax would break any existing scripts.
For what it's worth, Perl already has an unless control structure.
--
Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=40296edit=1
