Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:125073
Feedback-ID: ifab94697:Fastmail
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:07:41 +0200
To: internals@lists.php.net
Message-ID: <00ee5318-329c-4a85-a2cd-1fc7050103ba@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1E9FCFA6-4FAD-4F47-9FC6-6AA8F2FD6BBF@rwec.co.uk>
References: <2716f729-4008-4f75-8412-861d8960b746@app.fastmail.com>
 <cOoRTbvWeeI8DDj531R9b7NwiyLusi5oHFI_0FmZeOx-R5bs1dUC7VO5ZypChYBECwA8SBzrpEABGGH0mPKrLDsYMSfrhuZX2Gn6zUyP4fI=@gpb.moe>
 <26338153-6d16-456a-81bf-8231bdaf1b79@app.fastmail.com>
 <6197f6e1-d123-41e1-87c8-887c6508bfa2@rwec.co.uk>
 <97d993ee-c558-43a1-a36a-8e06aa2d829a@app.fastmail.com>
 <1E9FCFA6-4FAD-4F47-9FC6-6AA8F2FD6BBF@rwec.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] function autoloading v4 RFC
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary=198ba4175bc34c45849ffc0a65d57e01
From: rob@bottled.codes ("Rob Landers")

--198ba4175bc34c45849ffc0a65d57e01
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Aug 20, 2024, at 08:50, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
>=20
>=20
> On 20 August 2024 00:21:22 BST, Rob Landers <rob@bottled.codes> wrote:
> >
> >I assume you are worried about something like this passing test?
> >
> >--TEST--
> >show called only once
> >--FILE--
> ><?php
> >
> >namespace test;
> >
> >spl_autoload_register(function($name) {
> >    echo "name=3D$name\n";
> >}, true, false, SPL_AUTOLOAD_FUNCTION);
> >
> >echo strlen('foo');
> >echo strlen('bar');
> >echo strlen('baz');
> >?>
> >--EXPECT--
> >name=3Dtest\strlen
> >333
> >
> >In my RFC, I mention it is called exactly once.
>=20
>=20
> I haven't looked at the PR, only the RFC, and I did not see this very =
important detail explained anywhere. The only thing I can see is this ra=
ther ambiguous sentence:
>=20
> >  The function autoloader will not be called again.=20
>=20
> That could mean not called again for the current call (compared with p=
roposals that call it a second time with the unequalled name); it could =
mean not called again for the current line of code (based on the current=
 caching behaviour); or never called again for that combination of names=
pace and name; or possibly, never called again for that combination of n=
amespace, name, and callback function.
>=20
> That's not a small detail of the implementation, it's a really fundame=
ntal difference from previous proposals.=20
>=20
> So I would like to repeat my first response to your RFC: that it shoul=
d sound more time explaining your approach to the multiple lookup proble=
m.
>=20
> Regards,
> Rowan Tommins
> [IMSoP]
>=20

Thanks Rowan,

That's a fair critique.

I expect some of the wording will be more clear once I write out the doc=
umentation -- even if it isn't used directly, I tend to write out docume=
ntation to force myself to reconcile the code with the plan, find logic =
bugs, perform larger scale tests, and create tests to verify assertions =
in the documentation. From there, I'll update the plan or code to get ev=
erything to match and spend some time on clarity. It's the hardest part,=
 IMHO, as it requires diligently ensuring everything is correct. In othe=
r words, writing the documentation makes it feel like a "real thing" and=
 it triggers what small amount of perfectionism I have.

=E2=80=94 Rob
--198ba4175bc34c45849ffc0a65d57e01
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><title></title><style type=3D"text/css">p.Mso=
Normal,p.MsoNoSpacing{margin:0}=0Ap.MsoNormal,p.MsoNoSpacing{margin:0}</=
style></head><body><div>On Tue, Aug 20, 2024, at 08:50, Rowan Tommins [I=
MSoP] wrote:<br></div><blockquote type=3D"cite" id=3D"qt" style=3D""><di=
v><br></div><div><br></div><div>On 20 August 2024 00:21:22 BST, Rob Land=
ers &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:rob@bottled.codes">rob@bottled.codes</a>&gt; w=
rote:<br></div><div>&gt;<br></div><div>&gt;I assume you are worried abou=
t something like this passing test?<br></div><div>&gt;<br></div><div>&gt=
;--TEST--<br></div><div>&gt;show called only once<br></div><div>&gt;--FI=
LE--<br></div><div>&gt;&lt;?php<br></div><div>&gt;<br></div><div>&gt;nam=
espace test;<br></div><div>&gt;<br></div><div>&gt;spl_autoload_register(=
function($name) {<br></div><div>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; echo "name=3D$nam=
e\n";<br></div><div>&gt;}, true, false, SPL_AUTOLOAD_FUNCTION);<br></div=
><div>&gt;<br></div><div>&gt;echo strlen('foo');<br></div><div>&gt;echo =
strlen('bar');<br></div><div>&gt;echo strlen('baz');<br></div><div>&gt;?=
&gt;<br></div><div>&gt;--EXPECT--<br></div><div>&gt;name=3Dtest\strlen<b=
r></div><div>&gt;333<br></div><div>&gt;<br></div><div>&gt;In my RFC, I m=
ention it is called exactly once.<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div=
><div>I haven't looked at the PR, only the RFC, and I did not see this v=
ery important detail explained anywhere. The only thing I can see is thi=
s rather ambiguous sentence:<br></div><div><br></div><div>&gt;&nbsp; The=
 function autoloader will not be called again.&nbsp;<br></div><div><br><=
/div><div>That could mean not called again for the current call (compare=
d with proposals that call it a second time with the unequalled name); i=
t could mean not called again for the current line of code (based on the=
 current caching behaviour); or never called again for that combination =
of namespace and name; or possibly, never called again for that combinat=
ion of namespace, name, and callback function.<br></div><div><br></div><=
div>That's not a small detail of the implementation, it's a really funda=
mental difference from previous proposals.&nbsp;<br></div><div><br></div=
><div>So I would like to repeat my first response to your RFC: that it s=
hould sound more time explaining your approach to the multiple lookup pr=
oblem.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Regards,<br></div><div>Rowan Tommins=
<br></div><div>[IMSoP]<br></div><div><br></div></blockquote><div><br></d=
iv><div>Thanks Rowan,<br></div><div><br></div><div>That's a fair critiqu=
e.<br></div><div><br></div><div>I expect some of the wording will be mor=
e clear once I write out the documentation -- even if it isn't used dire=
ctly, I tend to write out documentation to force myself to reconcile the=
 code with the plan, find logic bugs, perform larger scale tests, and cr=
eate tests to verify assertions in the documentation. From there, I'll u=
pdate the plan or code to get everything to match and spend some time on=
 clarity. It's the hardest part, IMHO, as it requires diligently ensurin=
g everything is correct. In other words, writing the documentation makes=
 it feel like a "real thing" and it triggers what small amount of perfec=
tionism I have.<br></div><div><br></div><div id=3D"sig121229152">=E2=80=94=
 Rob<br></div></body></html>
--198ba4175bc34c45849ffc0a65d57e01--