Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:121379 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 32114 invoked from network); 18 Oct 2023 11:43:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 18 Oct 2023 11:43:47 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A981804B4 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 04:43:46 -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=-2.1 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, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-ua1-f41.google.com (mail-ua1-f41.google.com [209.85.222.41]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 04:43:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ua1-f41.google.com with SMTP id a1e0cc1a2514c-7ab94fff2acso122094241.0 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 04:43:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1697629425; x=1698234225; darn=lists.php.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=AsoQiu9vF25arb62Hv1pKU4IkIglI3ENtFgqYYHffrA=; b=Wya5+aV0+a90aKIvhuE8tmx4a7IvM/bhO/zN7bwp4bRIYgHo6cpkd4ulv6SXv50HjI aI0Vxzck229JnPxq732AKbAuTz/mZSnXmab2C3gwL5s6JngXCs9xwWwA1VZDS/amNnJb vedIQLyVe4VdrPOFzq7Isi7qvoOtZPUKYIHfp6GNHBm3IKgU+uSXnzGZsVfQk9dR8vap 0RHg3665Ek3/UYtBQEVtivlLJKJDoySMqZmKbLbtpTRuUPnhhgJ+ckAb/y/+86XpWcqD 19HomjO1V3l1/2IMgKBnjzj0J8E75pF4y8e0uPjmXHPKkiOlFaFPGP9gzSLBXx3vH6JV ca7A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697629425; x=1698234225; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=AsoQiu9vF25arb62Hv1pKU4IkIglI3ENtFgqYYHffrA=; b=Qt8qNy5TkBlgf/X/RB8n5isSccuv358ypn1VjQK92ivmyQJJQYohrVFt3asAmshRip q/v5ujdP4Rss1ItKdNHTmg0iWhYIYPgK0+x3owexqwDY2AgSZmgwsQ52zOXXCRzvgidA lftPluRcxG4e1QAjKpSLO6ZwM402CIt/du0yOr+u9Iv5MFXt0mI130uZMonTOqg3UTMV 91bF9yQPGygWs9GIiSWlq5wu/n8Wahfnl1xQhuNfQpk+tREZ7/m10XcrlOMYZBnCGWkg MhgAN9slhi8Lz9poWdmsGyAQL6eIVe8xpm21nfNMT6y2aPRC7LfAN2PIShrVv5x41yZV fhwA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyEe+QFg8F2v0DlIashz5RPNR4jMZKyF/TFO+0UhTsnpWC5XQHI B8YfEpR9LGvcwG1+nG3hR2JPvf0SvRStzKGKICPwVTDlk1s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH+drloUwSO4d0g+H2bFNyRJIKWSjpm5+h3+10lQDk/HjnX7M1tsK1jVVzdkZDqymxN/d6sQrQvUQfFplYznAM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:55:b0:48f:d0ca:b4a3 with SMTP id q21-20020a056122005500b0048fd0cab4a3mr3787534vkn.1.1697629425322; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 04:43:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <173ca550-71a0-4bd4-96f2-b64b6155115a@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 08:43:09 -0300 Message-ID: To: Robert Landers Cc: Brandon Jackson , Saki Takamachi , Levi Morrison via internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000db57360607fc267a" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Two new functions array_first() and array_last() From: deleugyn@gmail.com (Deleu) --000000000000db57360607fc267a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 4:31=E2=80=AFAM Robert Landers wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 5:26=E2=80=AFAM Deleu wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 3:43=E2=80=AFPM Brandon Jackson > > wrote: > > > > > > There is also a technique to make the return value `[$key =3D> $val= ue]` > > > instead of just a value, but this loses simplicity. > > > > > > Hmm, since the naming array_first and array_last doesn't clarify that > > > it's returning a key or a value. What if it returned both as ?[key, > > > value]. > > > > > > That opens quite a few use possibilities: > > > $first =3D array_first($array); > > > $value =3D $first[1] ?? throw new Exception(); > > > > > > [,$value] =3D array_first($array) ?? [null, null]; > > > [,$value] =3D array_first($array) ?? throw new Exception(); > > > Hey Marco, > > > This function signature can be accomplished by userland once we have > > `array_key_first()` and `array_first()`. > > This would always mean you have to keep them right next to each other, > it would be a best practice to do so and to split them up should be a > code smell in any static analysis. "You" (general you) don't always have to keep them right next to each other. Each function is self-sufficient and independent. Maybe on your personal bubble you might need to always keep them next to each other, which is why I suggested creating your own userland function that returns key and value together. > There is no way to tell if a Fiber > is involved in any function call in PHP, thus if you split them apart > and call a function, it is possible that your current Fiber is > suspended and another Fiber mutates the variable you are referencing > (this is especially true in Classes, not so much in pure functions). > I might be completely wrong here, but on my personal bubble, I consider Fibers to be a corner (a fraction) of PHP compared to non-Fibers PHP. Although Fibers took the approach to not "paint" [what color is] your function, it doesn't mean that Fibers can be used without taking precaution, as with any new tool. > Since they would always have to be right next to each other, it is > easier to just combine them into a single atomic function call, which > would negate the need for static analysis to be involved or surprises. > > > It's much better to keep > > `array_first()` as simple as possible and let everyone build their own > > approach to go about it since we have so many approaches. > > There is only one right approach that prevents Fibers from messing up > your day, and it would be considerable boilerplate code that you'd > have to type every time, as well as involve static analysis and watch > for "people who don't know" better in code reviews. > You say only one approach, but a return signature of `: [$key, $value]` or the `array_key(array $array, &$key =3D null) ` makes it at least 2 approach= es that would be fibers-safe, no? This is a discussion about an extremely basic functionality that PHP hasn't introduced up until now. I think it's an extremely great addition, but requires to focus first on the most basic aspect of it. Literally every beginner, mid-level, experienced and most senior PHP developers will work with PHP arrays on way or another. As such, a basic functionality like this should remain as basic as possible. If needed, PHP can port more helper functions into the core to cater for Fibers in the future. In my opinion, the only problem is the ambiguity of returning `null` which might mean the array is empty or might mean the first value is truly null. If we get a warning box on PHP Docs recommending people to pair this with `empty()` before using it, it gives users coverage for everything they will need most of the time. Personally, I think I'd prefer the function to throw an exception than to return `null` when array is empty to avoid ambiguity and force folks to use `empty()`, but that would also mean complicating the function more due to edge cases, which as I stated in this email, I'd rather have the simplest thing possible and let userland fill in the additional complexities needed. --=20 Marco Deleu --000000000000db57360607fc267a--