On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 8:10 PM Andrea Faulds wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Philipp Tanlak wrote:
> > I like to elaborate on Nikitas response: I don't think a mb_str_contains
> is
> > necessary, because the proposed function does not behave differently, if
> > the input strings are multibyte strings.
>
> This
Hi,
Philipp Tanlak wrote:
I like to elaborate on Nikitas response: I don't think a mb_str_contains is
necessary, because the proposed function does not behave differently, if
the input strings are multibyte strings.
This is not true for all character encodings. For UTF-8 it is correct,
but
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 10:47 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
> Hi internals,
>
> This has been discussed a while ago already, now as a proper proposal:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/token_as_object
>
> tl;dr is that it allows you to get token_get_all() output as an array of
> PhpToken objects. This reduces
On 15/02/2020 22:05, jan.h.boeh...@gmx.de wrote:
How many of you would prefer a interface solution for operator
overloading?
I wonder if the RFC voting should include the option to choose between
either the magic method approach (with the syntax proposed in the
current
RFC version) or using
> On Mar 2, 2020, at 9:30 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 9:43 PM wrote:
>
>> I have changed the proposed names for the bitshift handlers to '__lshift'
>> and '__rshift' (instead of __sl and __sr) to make more clear what operator
>> is handled by the method (also the method
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 14:46, Marco Pivetta wrote:
>
> The code above is NOT going to pass a code review.
>
It may not pass a code review *from you*, but I don't think your high
standards are a good benchmark for the way PHP is used throughout the world.
Let's put it this way: if my RFC
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 14:30, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> I think others have already expanded on why it's not possible to group
> operators in a meaningful way. The DateTime example is probably the most
> pertinent there, in that DateTime + DateTime is illegal, while DateTime -
> DateTime is legal.
Hey Rowan,
On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 3:39 PM Rowan Tommins
wrote:
> Hi Marco,
>
> On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 14:00, Marco Pivetta wrote:
>
> >
> > Overall against the RFC: `++` and `--` (prefix and suffix) are supposed
> to
> > be used with numeric values, not with other types, as that makes
>
Am 02.03.2020 um 15:00 schrieb Marco Pivetta :
> Overall against the RFC: `++` and `--` (prefix and suffix) are supposed to
> be used with numeric values, not with other types, as that makes everything
> only more confusing.
>
> Code written (intentionally) to use `++` and `--` against
Hi Marco,
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 14:00, Marco Pivetta wrote:
>
> Overall against the RFC: `++` and `--` (prefix and suffix) are supposed to
> be used with numeric values, not with other types, as that makes everything
> only more confusing.
>
While I'm generally sympathetic to that principle,
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 9:43 PM wrote:
> On 15/02/2020 22:05, jan.h.boeh...@gmx.de wrote:
> > Hi internals,
> >
> > based on the discussions here (https://externals.io/message/108300) and
> here
> > (https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/5156), I have created a proper RFC
> for
> > userspace
On 02/03/2020 14:08, Rowan Tommins wrote:
The problem with this kind of behaviour change is that there's no way
for PHP to know whether a particular piece of code has been changed to
expect the new behaviour or not
Lump it in with editions maybe?
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development
Hi Alexandru,
On 2 March 2020 09:22:57 GMT+00:00, "Alexandru Pătrănescu"
wrote:
>For point 1 and 2, both the old and new behavior is silent. Can we
>think of
>a safer way to migrate?
That's a very good question, and one I don't have a particularly good answer to.
The problem with this kind of
Hey Rowan,
Overall against the RFC: `++` and `--` (prefix and suffix) are supposed to
be used with numeric values, not with other types, as that makes everything
only more confusing.
Code written (intentionally) to use `++` and `--` against non-numeric
values should **NOT** pass a code review,
Hi Rowan,
Thank you for the effort, very good unification of behavior across
increment and decrement operations.
I would say that all 3 points are most probably code issues and potential
bugs.
I agree with all of them.
For point 3, the new behavior is an error. The problem will be caught
earlier
Hello internals!
As of today, two weeks have passed since the creation and discussion on the
str_contains RFC, without any major controversy. That's why I've updated
the RFC status to "Voting". So feel free to submit your vote.
The vote requires a 2/3 majority to be accepted and will end in two
16 matches
Mail list logo
