Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101795
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.67 as permitted sender)
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 21:28:15 +0000
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <CAEUnE0f2bFnMU6nXHXhoPApMOvkjyctY9iisyO8116K=Yn4Bdw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEUnE0cRR6jtU2GoeiP4SDLJejF4+6zY=fT1FiTKPe6aKwoFqg@mail.gmail.com> <4026445.Wp3pesFrPl@vulcan> <CAEUnE0eGNPDdfivttTPvp_4im5HuR20JmTn1EdRbiROkiiqGhA@mail.gmail.com> <28100667.gh41XH5Xuc@vulcan> <CAFMT4Noz6Jmy_sXnL-v95-xXdQ261+KzPQfMqNJYjW3Jdy0oww@mail.gmail.com> <CAEUnE0dTzxtcM-t=78j7=paqKwm7omNkxLOt+BcDCx+qi+_5Cw@mail.gmail.com> <8241EFDE-7510-49AD-997B-A0FB9B6ABD39@gmail.com> <CAEUnE0f2bFnMU6nXHXhoPApMOvkjyctY9iisyO8116K=Yn4Bdw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: internals@lists.php.net
Message-ID: <3B9A47E7-4A91-4F0F-B06F-D7A2E35478DD@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV][RFC][DISCUSSION] Collection Inspection
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

On 6 February 2018 21:10:54 GMT+00:00, Michael Morris <tendoaki@gmail=2Ecom=
> wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Rowan Collins <rowan=2Ecollins@gmail=2Eco=
m>
>wrote:
>> I may be being dumb, but I don't get why you keep referring to this
>as a
>> "hidden dependency"=2E It's a dependency, for sure, but why is it any
>more
>> "hidden" than any other utility library?

>The Dependency injector isn't aware of the reference and is unable to
>modify it in any way=2E  I've been taught to avoid such dependencies, and
>to
>avoid utility libraries which create such dependencies=2E

OK, I see what you mean=2E But surely it doesn't really have much relevanc=
e here, because a function or operator from the language's standard library=
 is just as invisible to dependency injection=2E In a sense, it's still a u=
tility library, just one that comes bundled with the language rather than i=
nstalled separately=2E

Indeed, a built-in function is even more restricted in what you can do wit=
h it than a userland one - for instance, you could replace the userland imp=
lementation simply by declaring your version first and not including the or=
iginal, but you can't overwrite a built-in function without hacking into th=
e engine=2E

I'm not saying this undermines the proposal for adding some extra array fu=
nctions or operators, but dependency injection and modification are certain=
ly not advantages of doing so=2E

Regards,

--=20
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]