Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:108832
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
CC: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] Straw poll: Places to allow function calls in constant
 expressions
Thread-Index: AQHV5TVGaQlwvBZF+k68DGwMXa9nx6g3Eo2AgAAowno=
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:34:00 +0000
Message-ID:
 <DM5PR07MB3067506024F85C119CB693D6F9E40@DM5PR07MB3067.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References:
 <CY4PR07MB306346D5C035C0BE8AB30195F9160@CY4PR07MB3063.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>,<CAF+90c8=aSvm2UcHR1h+Txsg7bJS1R3c-TS20cPVLXrVx+66og@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:
 <CAF+90c8=aSvm2UcHR1h+Txsg7bJS1R3c-TS20cPVLXrVx+66og@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US
Content-Language: en-CA
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-tmn: [uAxUBw+7QPIO/4p4FrJKCtr+OhMpEcMJl3SCFyOGXgstr4KVapcXlOvjS3kQCmvB]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-incomingheadercount: 46
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 785d5cb1-9ef2-447f-0e91-08d7bfa17127
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6NAM11HT108:
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info:
 0drXUloVM+sNIuxwOK/Xt8E5honsgkl2Ozlk54N+Xue6kiSeu1RJFz7pUKNZUNYlim5XAy3UIanUgMUn5u3i/LWK2upoeEtbsaNDlFqV2VHAk2FgJ7YKzDiAALztaSeu5TnTLIBQ3J9uZDMfKAEt+54npKUw/y6x5dcfM2PTk7liMe699Bc6lWpvOQW6urCnkYpFUXQ45KRatS9/t5u8Pcicl+VG+J5IeYtljuUqJtA=
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata:
 1WgVzTBR2iZeNKrm1YmPyq3eNCdVUFQq2pHieRzIzckN9TpMjjTfvBdfv0xWU1i8F3eL++LC4nIkuyOQio7E3DkqSrzXfcpLCgD/9CUUjBQM59K5gceAAJe00rWZNJa4oCT2G8yF2STWPw3ATegS/uTQrE7ClDOCfhRBf/QvbUVFtrIMxwW8c/O1lE7thdkQWKGuyGinaj+eEeX/hPqWMA==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 785d5cb1-9ef2-447f-0e91-08d7bfa17127
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 03 Mar 2020 18:34:00.4869
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6NAM11HT108
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Straw poll: Places to allow function calls in constant
 expressions
From: tysonandre775@hotmail.com (tyson andre)

> I feel like the results of this poll aren't going to be particularly=0A=
> meaningful, because it gets too caught up in the details and loses track =
of=0A=
> the big picture.=0A=
=0A=
I'd definitely agree. If I was writing the RFC for calls in constant expres=
sions again,=0A=
I'd focus more on adding concrete examples of where function calls/other ex=
pressions would make code easier to understand,=0A=
rather than focusing on implementation details.=0A=
At the time of writing the RFC, I thought a major objection would be whethe=
r or not it was actually feasible to implement,=0A=
and many people would be familiar with use cases where function calls in ex=
pressions would have made code more straightforward.=0A=
=0A=
> If you ask people whether they want to allow=0A=
>=0A=
>    function test($param =3D some_call()) {=0A=
>     }=0A=
>=0A=
> they're going to to tell you "no", because that seems pretty esoteric and=
=0A=
> most people likely do not see a use-case for it.=0A=
>=0A=
> If you ask the same people whether they want to write=0A=
>=0A=
>     function test(Dep $optionalDep =3D new Dep()) {=0A=
>     }=0A=
>=0A=
> instead of=0A=
>=0A=
>    function test(Dep $optionalDep =3D null) {=0A=
>        if ($optionalDep =3D=3D=3D null) {=0A=
>            $optionalDep =3D new Dep();=0A=
>        }=0A=
>    }=0A=
> a lot of them are probably going to tell you "yes" now. The question didn=
't=0A=
> really change (new Dep is just a different type of "function call"), but=
=0A=
> the perception changes a lot.=0A=
=0A=
Good example, I hadn't thought of mentioning `new` as an example for the "a=
s many expression types as possible".=0A=
That also lets functions clearly enforce arguments are non-null.=0A=
=0A=
> This is also why I think the focus on plain function calls in particular =
is=0A=
> somewhat detrimental. This is one of the cases where going for a paradigm=
=0A=
> shift (constant expression -> any expression) is "simpler" than doing an=
=0A=
> incremental change (extending constant expressions to allow function call=
s,=0A=
> and all the subtleties that entails.)=0A=
=0A=
The point of https://wiki.php.net/rfc/calls_in_constant_expressions_poll wa=
s to measure interest in "any expression",=0A=
but did a poor job of mentioning arguments in favor of it or how it'd simpl=
ify common examples.=0A=
With better arguments and examples, though, I'm still not certain if it'd b=
e a 2/3 majority for any option.=0A=
=0A=
A straw poll or RFC arguing *only* in favor of a paradigm shift with better=
 arguments and examples=0A=
might see different results.=0A=
=0A=
- Tyson=