Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:124327
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <mhbeurk_htxbQxzIEs98wQoR8Xczf-L7L8aCAIVhATD7wQiEUJwpAYxYS-llyac0pN761mnQJfpVQcDUoXAgasaWpWylpt6LE-I2oM4zrbk=@gpb.moe>
 <EE-aMte3i-_DTmSrqDgoaRPATmjLUcLt-k31baT8lqqCsrzIy0UsOyKo9rlBs51gWKUK7e7X3VYDuJmxhd6bxOGe52k8ITQgoN0_AE0RnoY=@gpb.moe>
In-Reply-To: <EE-aMte3i-_DTmSrqDgoaRPATmjLUcLt-k31baT8lqqCsrzIy0UsOyKo9rlBs51gWKUK7e7X3VYDuJmxhd6bxOGe52k8ITQgoN0_AE0RnoY=@gpb.moe>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 18:52:38 -0600
Message-ID: <CAAKU0umROg0TLOnA0dLpXVOLfV7rOjUhKaYXouTx-dV=CDtR3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Improve language coherence for the behaviour of
 offsets and containers
To: "Gina P. Banyard" <internals@gpb.moe>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
From: levi.morrison@datadoghq.com (Levi Morrison)

> Moreover, I know the traffic on the list has been pretty high, but I do intend to have this RFC up for voting for inclusion in PHP 8.4, and I'm not exactly sure how I am meant to interpret the lack of responses.

I am personally strongly in favor of the direction. As mentioned in
the PR, my main concern is honestly quite a small one: I think
`Appendable::append` ought to be renamed. Maybe `Appendable` and
`FetchAppendable` too.

The reason is that `append` is a common operation on a container type,
which is likely to want to implement these interfaces. I easily
identified a few such things with a quick GitHub search:
 1. https://github.com/pmjones/php-styler/blob/5c7603f420e3a75a5750b3e54cc95dfdbef7d6e2/src/Line.php#L166
 2. https://github.com/ParvulaCMS/parvula/blob/dcb1876bef70caa14d09e212838a35cb29e23411/core/Models/Config.php#L46

Given that I anticipate these methods to largely be called by
handlers, and not by names, I think an easy solution is to just name
this `offsetAppend` to match the other offset operations. For example,
I don't anticipate code doing:

    $container->append($item);

I expect largely they will do:

    $container[] = $item;

So it doesn't really matter if the name is `append` or `offsetAppend`
for the main use-case, and thereby we avoid some road bumps on
adoption. Any SPL containers with `append`, such as ArrayObject, can
make it an alias of `offsetAppend`, I think?

Anyway, this is a minor thing, and I will vote yes regardless of
whether it (and maybe the *Appendable interface names) are changed.
But I do think it would be prudent to change it. It would also match
the `offset*` convention of the other interfaces.