Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114773 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 56959 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2021 20:46:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 7 Jun 2021 20:46:58 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 005161804D8 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 14:01:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_SBL, URIBL_SBL_A autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-lf1-f46.google.com (mail-lf1-f46.google.com [209.85.167.46]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 14:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f46.google.com with SMTP id r198so25221680lff.11 for ; Mon, 07 Jun 2021 14:01:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JRK+R86aWQsoYS+72Oh94M1xrtaJQtSe+wYPdyOSV9s=; b=mAc/pzN1wbhwezxCyF22CI3Mqk3L96clU0pFPSlyxNR+oUXkZAuzADD88Hn6fVsAfn H39IMQm0ZWmLiR76bi7t/Hf25kWpxPGRrANxtQ11Z7PywqdRqDeC/cu2aBEkU0UbtZSZ PgBgKYn4nxK0gygCRt4CLJXyN+Ut3gGHZ/2TzUCAvCsB0tGoDlxBaJCBnBJZ6/f6OnoD 0LO06uHe4PVVxZcp+SMF4vs9TkIpHxXFDKJDBhPQVpI4/xqW2ZlDPp8jGaDTSjJ7lKvg Iw26/a/+0mtjSLISnofc/NhONgxfiOKP6CBRZM9cqkJ1pkrvbJ6j0UYkNfuYUPPWYA6l Eyig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JRK+R86aWQsoYS+72Oh94M1xrtaJQtSe+wYPdyOSV9s=; b=foxSwrzGvfSPi76HLVKdrhSqdFjZv0jWjYwnKwm62MEOnknHZFMZaDEkTSoEGF7Tv+ dEHnv3A0rWD05QszvDQguQKtrzuERWVs050mTtq3j/NilQmPCentTgxqPZRqqRQ+3rUE aALqW+B509GZ56QbC6Bf86KeGeML1Q8lpe5OrcSLIHlV5tp8GdWBbyL6dp1QaJP5KhcJ LaC+StpwyvbL7SBkCdWROfcdOBf2hvWkdyqDpTS/ch2Kn8HhMw928edoOX4gVGE7QiUG l3ABRXeGJPaE8F25QzEeIBonugx4yu4GcgOpZ5d8O4TgxH9oROhOTFrW8fu47xAh9MWs wRsA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Zu/pYpwiwr85qHLifAlQUNqEiUQG6rN6sT/gjPACCCQ2fs2kh QBqGKJWMVmu0bGhxY3zD8n6L4WQaikXhbn3mNen7xprO X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwUCdd1hM9xjN3g9wnfVajIwQL4YyjV7SzWonsjiNcyvG4I+Ag3S77QVM0VuXpxLTUSAMCM1Gx3lq43BASiRwk= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5cd6:: with SMTP id f22mr13838978lfq.73.1623099688816; Mon, 07 Jun 2021 14:01:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 23:00:52 +0200 Message-ID: To: Larry Garfield Cc: php internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000063139d05c43358c0" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Pipe Operator, take 2 From: gen.work@gmail.com (Eugene Leonovich) --00000000000063139d05c43358c0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 9:03 PM Larry Garfield wrote: > Hi folks. Me again. > > A year ago, I posted an RFC for a pipe operator, |>, aka function > concatenation. At the time, the main thrust of the feedback was "cool, > like, but we need partial function application first so that the syntax for > callables isn't so crappy." > > The PFA RFC is winding down now and is looking quite good, so it's time to > revisit pipes. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pipe-operator-v2 > > Nothing radical has changed in the proposal since last year. I have > updated it against the latest master. I also updated the RFC to use more > examples that assume PFA, as the result is legit much nicer. i also tested > it locally with a combined partials-and-pipes branch to make sure they play > nicely together, and they do. (Yay!) Assuming PFA passes I will include > those tests in the pipes branch before this one goes to a vote. > > FTR, there are several typos in the "Hello World" examples (*strto*t*upper, htmlent*i*ties*). Also, these examples will not work as written because explode() expects two arguments and will fail if you pass only one: https://3v4l.org/tLO0s. I wonder what the correct version of the pipe example (the one that uses strings as callbacks) would look like, given that you have to pass two arguments for explode()? -- Thank you and best regards, Eugene Leonovich --00000000000063139d05c43358c0--