Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118117
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMs36HcGzvwwTTU+nUO+U_M6o4qpOAHES7RbHEJWm6iot+-9=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABTDVhA8K3LLZU9--a7vXxUE7wmVJEy8yeXZ9JjXfKVDBTOsHA@mail.gmail.com> <CAC5V6gja7ZYX_aB+jrGu4ANsdfAVbZG9DYWYxNPSGwsu=JViGQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC5V6gja7ZYX_aB+jrGu4ANsdfAVbZG9DYWYxNPSGwsu=JViGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 10:53:39 +0900
Message-ID: <CAMs36HdH2n6asM7+3J+A0cxTQhNfxWFEgjx7oasy3LD85k4Cjw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Guilliam Xavier <guilliam.xavier@gmail.com>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b0197705e28c6ccb"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Under Discussion] Random Extension Improvement
From: g-kudo@colopl.co.jp (Go Kudo)

--000000000000b0197705e28c6ccb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2022=E5=B9=B46=E6=9C=8829=E6=97=A5(=E6=B0=B4) 0:39 Guilliam Xavier <guillia=
m.xavier@gmail.com>:

> > Hi Internals.
> >
> > Random Extension 5.x has been accepted by a vote of 20(+1)/0. (I made a
> > mistake in timing the closing of the vote and thus received one more
> vote)
> > Therefore, voting on the Random Extension Improvement RFC will begin on
> > 2022-07-02 as scheduled.
> >
> > Please check the RFC. This is the last chance to improve the
> implementation.
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/random_extension_improvement
>
> Hi,
>
> I just realized a little thing: in the array_rand() example, for
> $beforeSingle, it would probably be "more realistic" to omit `, 1`
> (which is already the default for $num).
>
> Note: for `Randomizer::pickArrayKeys(array $array, int $num): array`,
> it makes sense that $num does *not* have a default value (1 would be
> "weird" because the method always returns a *list of keys*, and
> count($array) [via null] would be "useless" because keys are returned
> *in their original order* [so it would make the method equivalent to
> array_keys($array) by default]),
> and that's probably a good thing (it forces to update the call by
> adding an explicit `, 1` argument and reminds to add a `[0]` or
> similar on the returned value).
>
> An alternative design would be `Randomizer::pickArrayKey(array
> $array): int|string`, but migrating existing uses with $num !=3D 1 would
> be harder, so probably not better.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Guilliam Xavier
>

This is certainly a complicated issue.

I proposed the signature `Randomizer::arrayPickKeys(array $array, int
$num): array` because it can be solved with the current PHP sugar syntax
and the default value of $num is 1 despite the name "arrayPickKeys".

However, this is a bit tricky and may not be user-friendly for the average
user.

So, how about adding two methods, `Randomizer::arrayPickKey(array $array):
int|string` and `Randomizer::arrayPickKeys(array $array, int $num): array`?

This may seem redundant, but it may avoid user confusion.

Regards
Go Kudo

--000000000000b0197705e28c6ccb--