Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:126510
Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 00:26:27 -0600
To: "php internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <5d8e68bd-a46c-4696-9a19-6daf7323efa0@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e73d708badfb33bd7b120d4be6d95c04@bastelstu.be>
References: <de8140ab-0941-45cd-ba20-4aece2f69aea@app.fastmail.com>
 <e73d708badfb33bd7b120d4be6d95c04@bastelstu.be>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Pipe Operator (again)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield")

On Mon, Feb 10, 2025, at 4:04 AM, Tim D=C3=BCsterhus wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 2025-02-07 05:57, schrieb Larry Garfield:
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pipe-operator-v3
>
> After also having taken a look at the implementation and then the=20
> updated =E2=80=9CPrecedence=E2=80=9D section, I'd like to argue in fav=
or of moving `|>`=20
> to have a higher precedence than the comparison operators (i.e. betwee=
n=20
> string concatenation and `<`). This would mean that `|>` has higher=20
> precedence than `??`, but looking at the following examples, that=20
> appears to be the more useful default anyways.
>
> I'm rather interested in handling a `null` pipe result:
>
>      $user =3D $request->get('id')
>          |> $database->fetchUser(...)
>          ?? new GuestUser();
>
> Than handling a null callback (using the RFC example, because I can't=20
> even think of a real-world use-case):
>
>      $res1 =3D 5
>          |> $null_func ?? defaultFunc(...);
>
> To give some more examples of what would be possible without parenthes=
es=20
> then:
>
>      $containsNotOnlyZero =3D $someString
>          |> fn ($str) =3D> str_replace('0', '', $str)
>          |> strlen(...)
>          > 0;
>
> Which is not particularly pretty, but appears to be more useful than=20
> either passing a boolean into a single-argument function or piping int=
o=20
> a boolean (which would error).
>
> Best regards
> Tim D=C3=BCsterhus

I have updated the patch and RFC accordingly.  I think you're right, it =
does make a bit more sense this way.

--Larry Garfield