Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:128574
Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 11:40:51 -0500
To: "php internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <090b74db-6e29-489e-870e-4c1e336c7746@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <AM8P250MB0170D1704EDE7B573D306C7BE238A@AM8P250MB0170.EURP250.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: 
 <CANBC5npwi3azjJwf3p0mWeNpEWvKpY9yuNQreX3A6MJBAwFWPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM8P250MB0170D1704EDE7B573D306C7BE238A@AM8P250MB0170.EURP250.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Add clamp function
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield")

On Wed, Aug 27, 2025, at 11:06 AM, Bob Weinand wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On 27.8.2025 15:34:53, Kyle Katarn wrote:
>> Hello, 
>> 
>> I handled the feedback received on the draft RCF https://wiki.php.net/rfc/clamp_v2
>> 
>> If I didn't forget anything this should be now ready for discussion. So I updated its status.
>> 
>> There is an implementation proposal: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/19434
>> And some draft for documentation here: https://github.com/php/doc-en/pull/4814
>> 
>> Thanks,
>
>
> As others have noted before, what's the motivation of having the 
> to-be-clamped value as first parameter rather than infixed between min 
> and max?
>
> E.g. from CSS: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/clamp:
>
> `clamp(min, val, max)`
>
> Feels to me as the most natural order, too.
>
>
>
> You mention it was taken from the first RFC, but that one also did not 
> discuss the ordering in the first place either.

Some quick data points from momentary googling:

CSS: clamp(min, val, max)

Python: clamp(val, min, max)
C++: clamp(val, min, max)
Java: clamp(val, in, max)
Javascript: clamp(val, min, max)
C#: clamp(val, min, max)

Kotlin: val.clamp(min, max) (as an extension function)
Ruby: val.clamp(min, max)

So it looks like CSS is the oddball here.  We should follow the clear majority approach.  (Kyle, feel free to include this in the RFC.)

--Larry Garfield