Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:125230
Feedback-ID: ifab94697:Fastmail
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 20:13:53 +0200
To: internals@lists.php.net
Message-ID: <af4aec99-a27f-49b7-910b-66ddca8884b9@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <a2113606-f44b-4ce5-9fce-d2e85c01591d@rwec.co.uk>
References: <0c8ed5d6-5507-4c41-8d7f-05d14ba8aa4c@scriptfusion.com>
 <0cfd3a28-3cb0-4478-85fb-cf086d8e5c66@app.fastmail.com>
 <bf9b4a5b-108c-4092-8751-569c1374b054@rwec.co.uk>
 <4dad8898-b6d3-4b1b-aa7c-bd8385857f11@app.fastmail.com>
 <a2113606-f44b-4ce5-9fce-d2e85c01591d@rwec.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Default expression
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary=bb4c1084afe54f1ab79169ce2f0b6414
From: rob@bottled.codes ("Rob Landers")

--bb4c1084afe54f1ab79169ce2f0b6414
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Sun, Aug 25, 2024, at 18:21, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> On 25/08/2024 16:54, Rob Landers wrote:
> > Hi Rowan, you went through a lot of trouble to write this out, and t=
he=20
> > reasoning makes sense to me. However, all the nonsensical things you=20
> > say shouldn=E2=80=99t be allowed are already perfectly allowed today=
, you just=20
> > have to type a bunch of boilerplate reflection code. There is no new=20
> > behavior here, just new syntax.=20
>=20
>=20
> Firstly, your response to John was essentially "please give more=20
> details" [https://externals.io/message/125183#125214], and your respon=
se=20
> to me is "thanks for the details, but I'm not going to engage with=20
> them". That's a bit frustrating.

Oh, my apologies! That wasn=E2=80=99t my intention! With John and yourse=
lf, I do agree with you. I=E2=80=99m just trying to understand the logic=
 in limiting it. As in, =E2=80=9CI intuitively feel the same way but I d=
on=E2=80=99t know why but maybe you do.=E2=80=9D Intuition sucks sometim=
es.=20

>=20
> Secondly, I don't think "it's possible with half a dozen lines of=20
> reflection, so it's fine for it to be a first-class feature of the=20
> language syntax" is a strong argument. The Reflection API is a bit lik=
e=20
> the Advanced Settings panel in a piece of software, it comes with a bi=
g=20
> "Proceed with Caution" warning. You only move something from that=20
> Advanced Settings panel to the main UI when it's going to be commonly=20
> used, and generally safe to use. I don't think allowing arbitrary=20
> operations on a value that's declared as the default of some other=20
> function passes that test.
>=20
> Regards,
>=20
> --=20
> Rowan Tommins
> [IMSoP]
>=20

That makes sense, but is it uncommon because it is hard and slow, or bec=
ause it is genuinely not a common need?

=E2=80=94 Rob
--bb4c1084afe54f1ab79169ce2f0b6414
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}</style></head><body><div><br></div><div>=
<br></div><div>On Sun, Aug 25, 2024, at 18:21, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wro=
te:<br></div><blockquote type=3D"cite" id=3D"qt" style=3D""><div>On 25/0=
8/2024 16:54, Rob Landers wrote:<br></div><div>&gt; Hi Rowan, you went t=
hrough a lot of trouble to write this out, and the&nbsp;<br></div><div>&=
gt; reasoning makes sense to me. However, all the nonsensical things you=
&nbsp;<br></div><div>&gt; say shouldn=E2=80=99t be allowed are already p=
erfectly allowed today, you just&nbsp;<br></div><div>&gt; have to type a=
 bunch of boilerplate reflection code. There is no new&nbsp;<br></div><d=
iv>&gt; behavior here, just new syntax.&nbsp;<br></div><div><br></div><d=
iv><br></div><div>Firstly, your response to John was essentially "please=
 give more&nbsp;<br></div><div>details" [<a href=3D"https://externals.io=
/message/125183#125214">https://externals.io/message/125183#125214</a>],=
 and your response&nbsp;<br></div><div>to me is "thanks for the details,=
 but I'm not going to engage with&nbsp;<br></div><div>them". That's a bi=
t frustrating.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Oh, my apologie=
s! That wasn=E2=80=99t my intention! With John and yourself, I do agree =
with you. I=E2=80=99m just trying to understand the logic in limiting it=
. As in, =E2=80=9CI intuitively feel the same way but I don=E2=80=99t kn=
ow why but maybe you do.=E2=80=9D Intuition sucks sometimes.&nbsp;</div>=
<div><br></div><blockquote type=3D"cite" id=3D"qt" style=3D""><div><br><=
/div><div>Secondly, I don't think "it's possible with half a dozen lines=
 of&nbsp;<br></div><div>reflection, so it's fine for it to be a first-cl=
ass feature of the&nbsp;<br></div><div>language syntax" is a strong argu=
ment. The Reflection API is a bit like&nbsp;<br></div><div>the Advanced =
Settings panel in a piece of software, it comes with a big&nbsp;<br></di=
v><div>"Proceed with Caution" warning. You only move something from that=
&nbsp;<br></div><div>Advanced Settings panel to the main UI when it's go=
ing to be commonly&nbsp;<br></div><div>used, and generally safe to use. =
I don't think allowing arbitrary&nbsp;<br></div><div>operations on a val=
ue that's declared as the default of some other&nbsp;<br></div><div>func=
tion passes that test.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Regards,<br></div><d=
iv><br></div><div>--&nbsp;<br></div><div>Rowan Tommins<br></div><div>[IM=
SoP]<br></div><div><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That makes=
 sense, but is it uncommon because it is hard and slow, or because it is=
 genuinely not a common need?</div><div><br></div><div id=3D"sig12122915=
2">=E2=80=94 Rob<br></div></body></html>
--bb4c1084afe54f1ab79169ce2f0b6414--