Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:112048
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAJmy8YGSWkzEu1g2c9o=+5jSHEXGb=vW0dKcEwrHtKGPyC+eCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ffa2774b-757e-879d-7bfa-dc554e4cc04a@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <ffa2774b-757e-879d-7bfa-dc554e4cc04a@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:01:12 -0500
Message-ID: <CAESVnVpxUsXQnhMWMLovJWwW+HByx=R_OndcitQPUpg0c-axPw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@gmx.de>
Cc: Hans Henrik Bergan <divinity76@gmail.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c6284705b18f869e"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: want an Object-oriented interface for HashContext
From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon)

--000000000000c6284705b18f869e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 7:55 AM Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de>
wrote:
>
> On 12.10.2020 at 13:49, Hans Henrik Bergan wrote:
>
> > something like
> >
> > $result = (new
HashContext("SHA1"))->update($str1)->update($str2)->final();
> >
> > (userland sample imp: https://3v4l.org/lXd3u )
> >
> > I tried asking on the bugtracker ( https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=80221
) ,
> > but was told to ask on this mailing list instead.
>
> Thanks for bringing this up on the mailing list!
>
> I basically very much support a proper OOP interface, but I think the
> method names should use camel-case (e.g. ::updateFile() instead of
> ::update_file()), and it might be appropriate to rename ::final() to
> ::finalize().  More bikeshedding regarding the method names, and maybe
> their signatures might be in order.  We do not necessarily have to make
> these methods aliases of the existing functions, although that's of
> course possible.
>

Ditto all this.  When we converted resource<hash context> to
object<HashContext> I fully intended to propose adding methods on the
context using pretty much exactly the API you describe.  Digests lend
themselves quite well to this, tbqh.  I did want to separate the tech debt
of removing resources from the feature creep of adding an OOP API though,
and with that release already quite featurefull, plans to expand it fell by
the wayside.

Happy to co-author an RFC with you if you'd like to get involved directly,
or I can just pick up the ball and run with it if you'd rather make the
feature request then step back.

-Sara

--000000000000c6284705b18f869e--