On 07/18/2012 05:10 PM, David Muir wrote:
> On 19/07/12 04:49, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
>> On 07/18/2012 01:02 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Stas Malyshev
>>>>> See the other answers, clear APIs, no more argument mess, cleanness.
>>>> Cleanness has nothing to do with pseudo-objects.You don't have to use
>>>> -> to have clean APIs, and using -> doesn't automatically make your
>>> I really do not want to have a semantic discussion here.
>>> This syntax is sexy, allows us to clean our APIs, and is amazingly
>> This makes no sense to me either. How does it let us clean the APIs? Can
>> you give an example? I have one:
>> $a = -5;
>> $b = "-5";
>> echo $a->abs(); // Outputs 5
>> echo $b->abs(); // should still output 5
>> What has been cleaned here over:
>> echo abs($a);
>> echo abs($b);
>> other than being 2 characters longer to type? It's not like you can
>> remove abs() from the string pseudo-object, so you are essentially just
>> taking all the functions in the global namespace and attaching them as a
>> method to every pseudo-object. Is that clean?
>> I think there is something we can do around this, but an argument of "it
>> is sexy and clean" needs to be backed up with some actual implementation
>> details that make sense.
> Which is the needle, and which is the haystack?
> $pos = strpos($string, 'a');
> $pos = strpos('a', $string);
> $pos = $string->pos('a');
> $pos = 'a'->pos($string);
> I'm not proposing to use pos() as the method name, just showing an
> example that this syntax can be cleaner.
Or you could simply remember that it is always haystack,needle for
strings and needle,haystack for arrays. Not that complicated.
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php