Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:121540
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAM2mkbRmcwG8C_Y6Jxdr8Me1N8Cu06JqFdPKtKjJZ9msRy_LRw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ca92f7f5-7c32-4518-b8d6-4cb02b3e4e73@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ca92f7f5-7c32-4518-b8d6-4cb02b3e4e73@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 10:49:45 +0100
Message-ID: <CAM2mkbRA7y2OTPT+7-XHQ_0-YevYxWMscVye-EZbcMHbasCRSg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rowan Tommins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d3b3300609001366"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function
From: alessandro.a.rosa@gmail.com (Alessandro Rosa)

--000000000000d3b3300609001366
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi Mr. Tommins,

thank you very much for all your very valuable advices.
You can read a more robust discussion about my RFC at

https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_function

Regards,

Alessandro Rosa

Il giorno lun 30 ott 2023 alle ore 23:54 Rowan Tommins <
rowan.collins@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> On 30/10/2023 12:24, Alessandro Rosa wrote:
> > I have posted a new RFC at this link
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/empty_function where I suggested some
> > improvements to the standard built-in empty() function and provided a
> > number of examples.
>
>
> Hi, and welcome!
>
>
> First, regarding the clarity of the proposal.
>
> You have a few pieces of sample code in the RFC, but the "expected
> value" comments don't actually match what that code would output. Rather
> than inline comments on each line, I suggest you give the current output
> of the whole code, followed by the expected / desired output. I would
> also suggest replacing "<br/>" with "\n", to keep the code smaller.
>
> Similarly, your PHP-implemented version of the function is trying to be
> far too clever. If you want to illustrate what you think the rules
> should be, you need a clear, well-commented function implementing those
> rules. The first if statement, for instance, is just a very confusing
> way to write "if ( $input === null ) { return true; }"
>
> Neither style of example really explains why you think your proposed
> rules make sense. *Why* should boolean true be considered empty? In what
> situation would you call the function with no arguments and expect a
> meaningful response?
>
>
> Second, regarding timescales.
>
> As documented at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/releaseprocess the official
> policy of the project is that backwards compatibility can only be broken
> in a major version - that is, the next chance to break compatibility is
> in 9.0, not 8.anything. While there are often grey areas around this
> rule, there is absolutely no question that empty() could be removed any
> time before that. If anything, proposing removal in 10.0 might be more
> reasonable.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Rowan Tommins
> [IMSoP]
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--000000000000d3b3300609001366--