Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:121544 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 82105 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2023 11:53:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 31 Oct 2023 11:53:26 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2F981804B0 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2023 04:53:25 -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-qv1-f47.google.com (mail-qv1-f47.google.com [209.85.219.47]) (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 ; Tue, 31 Oct 2023 04:53:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-66d060aa2a4so39085366d6.2 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2023 04:53:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1698753204; x=1699358004; 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=YlMEJHICfJb1adlhlBkUMm1DVUulomspH4E5vC4xCvY=; b=arFHsA05EaW6SCDRKYMRjK/z8PELl+VlaCd8CuFl1FZtnb0Ks2kri5o1m1wk9VNvoT YcDYYP4RtPPwfwgcJH2s+mR+xtrAYnQbgXxNLSS87GXc5FsO5WMXfH08iMWm2uIVDLqk vR3w5S8KSR/RUZ0A333IA62mt/7Mcv35G3RV3J9kju6QUAig1gmXGyMSX9ut+mXjMZi7 RxHB2qzlrx450bwI0H2D3w6/uyocnm99Pd2kht724UQfnL7BJqz7sPq4Bses6CvwIcB+ swJdvhWustyG4OKxcYwVJUFaf1Yt+gYaHZlWHmBbiC1m6i1/R6vOPn3lvIwUh41vzVyp A9gQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1698753204; x=1699358004; 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=YlMEJHICfJb1adlhlBkUMm1DVUulomspH4E5vC4xCvY=; b=R+Yr47kU1yZhoUGNnVDt+6TEKfpZJOXrVxc3aAgsHrDdVJ4WbUd9PUshp0iJFyWMEd 19A02j+bi+NsvAD2xQsHETbIOQvM19Ly1oY55XVcCxkpcti1JXhU04Y3A1xXJTrKlybV wbbOJ4EIv0ihBufgr5cN5e8uWx8INpZG9z5Wlty//l0NiXpbDDUpVkSFSGkfdeENo7Q4 3RonPAxQRo4P8oOvt1uboYKyrGEuFwn/4TKkDQwHgD9aozE3/WmS99hKpgNOMFBK+MXk x5jvfabePKFaG7W8mQ0/VunlzElqrXQksY+ehb4ObdslMBbJREBeA/ejcw2pTg3pyvFC BTdg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzauTlOeA4xdTetOrZWW8k3fajnJ8Uc1OnkIUmuAnVPlBF3v5gE Bup+XYZVm58LVoPEQ77ycqxDLxlWeFcE3+NkKpy08Sy8LNw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHMu0Ry7IBdyiHrQ+viemcetioae6RRFIZ1w4IQMbXjlPjajuYY75w+UCRGgDACfbWED/PFh18vabs2+/XLBOE= X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5ecd:0:b0:66d:28b3:798 with SMTP id jm13-20020ad45ecd000000b0066d28b30798mr15082118qvb.10.1698753204616; Tue, 31 Oct 2023 04:53:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1f170e8f-5002-4ea3-b6b8-0a0c19435b8c@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 12:53:13 +0100 Message-ID: To: "G. P. B." Cc: Marcos Marcolin , internals@lists.php.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000528170060901cdd4" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] New RFC : empty() function From: alessandro.a.rosa@gmail.com (Alessandro Rosa) --000000000000528170060901cdd4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Thank you, G.P.B. for editing and for sharing your honest viewpoint. I saw your corrections and already fixed some flaws in the RFC text. I raised issues that are critical on my modest viewpoint. I see languages as an optimal mix between semantics, grammar and performance. The built-in empty() functions really needs to be revisited along these directions. Sincerely, Alessandro Rosa Il giorno mar 31 ott 2023 alle ore 12:34 G. P. B. ha scritto: > > On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 at 11:23, Alessandro Rosa > wrote: > >> Hi Marcos, >> >> thanks for feedback. >> Could you be clearer about your advice and gimme an example please? >> > > I have edited the RFC content to add highlighting, hopefully you can now > use that to improve the RFC text. > > However, I'm not very convinced at the moment that such a function is > truly useful. > > Best regards, > > Gina/George P. Banyard > > > > --000000000000528170060901cdd4--