Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:130026
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABVsiphxzSjri5BU+-HUYP2JgoGFOgN4epDTG9exVpJZFNw71g@mail.gmail.com>
 <e5ec59e24469fae8fd24b8e222d7917c@bastelstu.be> <CABVsipgm5LZd-_6WPVknsKKFq2Y7EQ9EUFiDYAHuSdX9B96e2g@mail.gmail.com>
 <15b6506dc69bd13eceffd36375f83509@bastelstu.be> <CABVsipgXrqv9Ra95oRFSqdyesEZU-AiOrZtveSPPBHPXG9EeUQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABVsipiCP2DehmWpf5Z+mRjZGs2gBp8qtbuQpgEsig753Jhmqw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPyj-LDi8v0MH-PkEBR8waxYoCgo=QciThha+M+WxEYsK7Bohg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPyj-LDi8v0MH-PkEBR8waxYoCgo=QciThha+M+WxEYsK7Bohg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 11:19:53 +0100
Message-ID: <CABVsiphAPy+UiFoM-zG+n3tE_nz2xLTtCTW_vBpB5WPcn8i+Hg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Prefix and Suffix Functions
To: Ilija Tovilo <tovilo.ilija@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000264ab064a252296"
From: barel.barelon@gmail.com (Barel)

--0000000000000264ab064a252296
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 6 Feb 2026 at 10:53, Ilija Tovilo <tovilo.ilija@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Carlos
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 10:41=E2=80=AFAM Barel <barel.barelon@gmail.com> w=
rote:
> >
> > It's been 14 days since the last change to the RFC and there have been
> no further discussions, so the cooldown period is over and I would like t=
o
> announce the start of the voting
> >
> > Link to the RFC for reference:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/prefix_suffix_functions
>
> Sorry for my late feedback.
>
> What's the rationale for $subject being the last parameter only in
> str_prefix_replace() and str_suffix_replace()? I feel pretty strongly
> that the subject should always be the first parameter. We don't want
> to add to the classic haystack/needle confusion.
>
> Regards,
> Ilija
>

Hi Ilija

These new functions follow the format of their closest existing relatives,
thus  the _ensure and _remove functions follow the format of the
str_starts_with, str_ends_with and str_contains functions where the subject
is the first parameter, while the _replace functions follow the format of
the str_replace and preg_replace functions where the subject is the last
parameter. It is unfortunate that these two groups of functions follow
different standards but I thought it would be better to keep as close to
existing functions as possible

Cheers

Carlos

--0000000000000264ab064a252296
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote g=
mail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, 6 Feb 2=
026 at 10:53, Ilija Tovilo &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:tovilo.ilija@gmail.com">to=
vilo.ilija@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204=
);padding-left:1ex">Hi Carlos<br>
<br>
On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 10:41=E2=80=AFAM Barel &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:barel.b=
arelon@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">barel.barelon@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<=
br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; It&#39;s been 14 days since the last change to the RFC and there have =
been no further discussions, so the cooldown period is over and I would lik=
e to announce the start of the voting<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Link to the RFC for reference: <a href=3D"https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pre=
fix_suffix_functions" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://wiki.php=
.net/rfc/prefix_suffix_functions</a><br>
<br>
Sorry for my late feedback.<br>
<br>
What&#39;s the rationale for $subject being the last parameter only in<br>
str_prefix_replace() and str_suffix_replace()? I feel pretty strongly<br>
that the subject should always be the first parameter. We don&#39;t want<br=
>
to add to the classic haystack/needle confusion.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Ilija<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Hi Ilija</div><div><br></div><div=
>These new functions follow the format of their closest existing relatives,=
 thus=C2=A0 the _ensure and=C2=A0_remove functions follow the format of the=
 str_starts_with, str_ends_with and str_contains functions where the subjec=
t is the first parameter, while the _replace functions follow the format of=
 the str_replace and preg_replace functions where the subject is the last p=
arameter. It is unfortunate that these two groups of functions follow diffe=
rent standards but I thought it would be better to keep as close to existin=
g functions as possible<br><br>Cheers<br><br>Carlos</div></div></div>

--0000000000000264ab064a252296--