Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:123318
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Transform exit() from a language construct into a
 standard function
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <GUMp_LJKefk4aLz9P9MA-zonKuik6uUNWZTtOAx-IeIhjPFsgfT3HHECPpyGF_ujq-LxI6tzBxMYgL5CMVGRkyzxSugweKix_YUGo2rXnb4=@gpb.moe>
 <b31ba813-c1b2-4cbb-9957-8727b85a81f9@gmail.com>
 <CAAwFBqqiFZffqiGjYZKz7etCpfveNPquK9k9LmyrgyrRjQ=RLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <0a30b095-149d-cb45-3f54-3d904774c139@php.net>
 <CAPTD5yEodJVv916TWzGRnJ+vjkSBTqTARHqY88axzdt_f1-hFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <WwSml-ASic7J5Vur6WPoVbfMSPjoh52mGc_wkGaux9dFe96F4lzh-yG7I3DmyDkXOu3-JiOHQShf2ft5sBZ6EX2x2V357qimf6m1gy3hwNM=@gpb.moe>
Message-ID: <66439034.8030905@adviesenzo.nl>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 18:24:20 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.7.0
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <WwSml-ASic7J5Vur6WPoVbfMSPjoh52mGc_wkGaux9dFe96F4lzh-yG7I3DmyDkXOu3-JiOHQShf2ft5sBZ6EX2x2V357qimf6m1gy3hwNM=@gpb.moe>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------030307050700030207000900"
From: php-internals_nospam@adviesenzo.nl (Juliette Reinders Folmer)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------030307050700030207000900
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 11-5-2024 16:43, Gina P. Banyard wrote:
>
> On Thursday, 9 May 2024 at 15:17, Jorg Sowa <jorg.sowa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I don't think there are any other "functions" like this.
>>
>> What about list(), isset(), print(), echo(), require(), include(), 
>> unset(), empty()? We use them the same way as functions, but those 
>> are not real functions.
>>
>
> list() (and array()) may look like functions but do not behave like 
> one as they affect the current scope by setting various variables.
>
> isset()/empty()/unset() require to work with undefined variables and 
> have deeply ingrained behaviour within the engine, so making them 
> simple functions is not as much of a "trivial" change.
>
> print, echo, include(_once) and require(_once) do not mandate their 
> "argument" to be passed within parenthethis, so making them functions 
> does not simplify the lexer/parser nor removes them as keywords.
> Also I don't know the last time I've used those language constructs 
> "like a function".
>

Seeing this list, makes me wonder: what about eval() ?

--------------030307050700030207000900
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11-5-2024 16:43, Gina P. Banyard
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:WwSml-ASic7J5Vur6WPoVbfMSPjoh52mGc_wkGaux9dFe96F4lzh-yG7I3DmyDkXOu3-JiOHQShf2ft5sBZ6EX2x2V357qimf6m1gy3hwNM=@gpb.moe"
      type="cite"><br>
      <div class="protonmail_quote"> On Thursday, 9 May 2024 at 15:17,
        Jorg Sowa <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jorg.sowa@gmail.com">&lt;jorg.sowa@gmail.com&gt;</a> wrote:<br>
        <blockquote class="protonmail_quote" type="cite">
          <div dir="ltr">
            <div>
              <div>
                <div>&gt; I don't think there are any other "functions"
                  like this.<br>
                  <br>
                </div>
                What about list(), isset(), print(), echo(), require(),
                include(), unset(), empty()? We use them the same way as
                functions, but those are not real functions.<br>
                <br>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
      <br>
      <div class="protonmail_quote" style="font-family: Arial,
        sans-serif; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
        background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">list() (and array()) may
        look like functions but do not behave like one as they affect
        the current scope by setting various variables.</div>
      <div class="protonmail_quote" style="font-family: Arial,
        sans-serif; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
        background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><br>
      </div>
      <div class="protonmail_quote" style="font-family: Arial,
        sans-serif; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
        background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">isset()/empty()/unset()
        require to work with undefined variables and have deeply
        ingrained behaviour within the engine, so making them simple
        functions is not as much of a "trivial" change.</div>
      <div class="protonmail_quote" style="font-family: Arial,
        sans-serif; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
        background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><br>
      </div>
      <div class="protonmail_quote" style="font-family: Arial,
        sans-serif; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
        background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">print, echo,
        include(_once) and require(_once) do not mandate their
        "argument" to be passed within parenthethis, so making them
        functions does not simplify the lexer/parser nor removes them as
        keywords.</div>
      <div class="protonmail_quote" style="font-family: Arial,
        sans-serif; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
        background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Also I don't know the
        last time I've used those language constructs "like a function".</div>
      <div class="protonmail_quote" style="font-family: Arial,
        sans-serif; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
        background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><br>
      </div>
      <div class="protonmail_quote"> </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Seeing this list, makes me wonder: what about eval() ? <br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------030307050700030207000900--