Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118231
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1657331615.886786918@f311.i.mail.ru>
References: <CAKVXxD9TDf2Hej4v7OLcNbcPa3Pv30XSry5CnrqHQ2X0suY-NA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1657331615.886786918@f311.i.mail.ru>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2022 14:02:21 +1000
Message-ID: <CAKVXxD95=CsaQ3La9khQf8OobfjP3CYkqg-yTuL711mrBjkLgg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kirill Nesmeyanov <nesk@xakep.ru>
Cc: internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c92e2105e35762d4"
Subject: Re: Character range syntax ".." for character masks
From: mickmackusa@gmail.com (mickmackusa)

--000000000000c92e2105e35762d4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Saturday, July 9, 2022, Kirill Nesmeyanov <nesk@xakep.ru> wrote:

>
> Note that the "..." operator is unary, so there is no syntax conflict whe=
n
> using two floats:
> ```
> echo 0...1; // 00.1
> ```
>
> However, in the case of the ".." operator, it is assumed to be a binary
> operator, so problems with grammar ambiguity may arise:
> ```
> echo 0 ..1; // 00.1
> echo 0.. 1; // 01
> ```
>
> *  Note: The syntax you suggest is widely used in at least Ruby (
> https://ruby-doc.org/core-2.5.1/Range.html ) and CoffeeScript.
> *  Note: There is also a `trim`, `ltrim` and `rtrim` functions
>
> >=D0=A1=D1=83=D0=B1=D0=B1=D0=BE=D1=82=D0=B0, 9 =D0=B8=D1=8E=D0=BB=D1=8F 2=
022, 2:56 +03:00 =D0=BE=D1=82 mickmackusa <mickmackusa@gmail.com>:
> >
> >I've discovered that several native string functions offer a character
> mask
> >as a parameter.
> >
> >I've laid out my observations at
> >https://stackoverflow.com/q/72865138/2943403
> >
> >In a nutshell, not all character masks offer ranges via "double dot"
> >syntax. Or should I refer to ".." as the "string spread operator" to avo=
id
> >naming conflict with "..." -- the better known "spread operator" (array
> >spread operator)?
> >
> >Rowan/@IMSoP informed me that the current division between the haves and
> >the have-nots appears to be based on the source language from which PHP
> >pulled. Essentially, if from C, the double dot does not represent a rang=
e.
> >https://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/11?m=3D54864842#54864842
> >
> >Character ranges are not yet supported for:
> >- strcspn()
> >- strpbrk()
> >- strspn()
> >
> >Before I fire off an RFC, I would like to know:
> >
> >1. Are there any reasonable objections to consistently implementing
> >character range expressions for all character masks?
> >2. Are there any native functions that I did not mention my Stack Overfl=
ow
> >answer?
> >3. Is it true that only single-byte characters can be used in all
> >scenarios? If so, must it remain that way?
> >4. Is there already an official or widely-used term that I should be usi=
ng
> >for the two-dot operator?
> >
> >I should also mention that I initially considered requesting that all
> >character mask parameters be named $mask (instead of $separators, $token=
,
> >or $characters), but I later resigned to the fact that changing to a nam=
e
> >that describes the texture of the string would remove the more
> >vital/intuitive purpose of the string. I suppose the best that can be do=
ne
> >to inform developers is to explicitly mention in the documentation when
> >character range expressions are implemented and demonstrate their usage =
in
> >an example (not just as a user comment at the bottom; this isn't In-N-Ou=
t
> >Burger -- put your offerings on the frickin' menu!).
> >
> >mickmackusa
>
>
> --
> Kirill Nesmeyanov
>


Thanks for your reply, Kirill, but I am no way trying to introduce a new,
general use operator for all encountered strings.

I am purely focused on having the operator consistently implemented for all
character masks.

The language construct `echo` does not have a specified character mask
parameter.

mickmackusa

--000000000000c92e2105e35762d4--