Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:130321
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABVsipj2zp8tmZpY0WVUFrLNDJCOdpfege7PCFEwzt-XgpBn4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4203ACE0-03F4-457B-A542-C9FC2B72AE98@php.net>
In-Reply-To: <4203ACE0-03F4-457B-A542-C9FC2B72AE98@php.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2026 10:14:49 +0100
Message-ID: <CABVsiph98QvUQO7QeQJkJ=z_rzOFVtXa31CdqocM51GOQHEfew@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Array arguments for str functions
To: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006520f8064d0c89bc"
From: barel.barelon@gmail.com (Barel)

--0000000000006520f8064d0c89bc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, 15 Mar 2026 at 09:20, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> wrote:

> On 15 March 2026 08:20:38 CET, Barel <barel.barelon@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I would like to create an RFC proposal suggesting modifying the
> >str_contains, str_starts_with and str_ends_with functions so that they c=
an
> >accept an array argument for the $needle parameter (apart from accepting=
 a
> >string as they do now). If an array is passed and the $haystack string
> >contains, starts with or ends with any of the strings in the array then
> the
> >functions will return true, otherwise returns false.
> >
> >I looked at the RFCs where these functions were added and at the related
> >internal discussions and could not find any discussion about this
> >possibility.
> >Before creating the RFC I would like to hear the thoughts of the group,
> >many thanks in advance
> >
> >Cheers
> >
> >Carlos
>
> The semantics for starts_with and ends_with are easy to argue they should
> mean any element, but for str_contains it could be useful to have either
> all, or any.
>
> I'm therefore thinking it might be better to have separate functions to
> make this clear.
>
> cheers
> Derick


Thanks Derick,

While =E2=80=9Ccontains all=E2=80=9D semantics can be useful in some niche =
scenarios, I
believe they are much less frequent than the "contains any" semantics. And
=E2=80=9Ccontains any=E2=80=9D is the direct parallel to the proposed behav=
ior for
str_starts_with() and str_ends_with(), keeping the mental model consistent
across all three functions. Would like to hear the thoughts of other people
about this issue

Cheers

Carlos

--0000000000006520f8064d0c89bc
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Sun, 15 Mar 2026 at 09:20, Derick Reth=
ans &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:derick@php.net">derick@php.net</a>&gt; wrote:</di=
v><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><blockquote class=3D"gma=
il_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,2=
04,204);padding-left:1ex">On 15 March 2026 08:20:38 CET, Barel &lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:barel.barelon@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">barel.barelon@gmail.c=
om</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;Hi all,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;I would like to create an RFC proposal suggesting modifying the<br>
&gt;str_contains, str_starts_with and str_ends_with functions so that they =
can<br>
&gt;accept an array argument for the $needle parameter (apart from acceptin=
g a<br>
&gt;string as they do now). If an array is passed and the $haystack string<=
br>
&gt;contains, starts with or ends with any of the strings in the array then=
 the<br>
&gt;functions will return true, otherwise returns false.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;I looked at the RFCs where these functions were added and at the relate=
d<br>
&gt;internal discussions and could not find any discussion about this<br>
&gt;possibility.<br>
&gt;Before creating the RFC I would like to hear the thoughts of the group,=
<br>
&gt;many thanks in advance<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Cheers<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;Carlos<br>
<br>
The semantics for starts_with and ends_with are easy to argue they should m=
ean any element, but for str_contains it could be useful to have either all=
, or any.<br>
<br>
I&#39;m therefore thinking it might be better to have separate functions to=
 make this clear.<br>
<br>
cheers<br>
Derick</blockquote><div><br>Thanks Derick,<br><br>While =E2=80=9Ccontains a=
ll=E2=80=9D semantics can be useful in some niche scenarios, I believe they=
 are much less frequent than the &quot;contains any&quot; semantics. And =
=E2=80=9Ccontains any=E2=80=9D is the direct parallel to the proposed behav=
ior for <code>str_starts_with()</code> and <code>str_ends_with()</code>, ke=
eping the mental model consistent across all three functions. Would like to=
 hear the thoughts of other people about this issue<br><br>Cheers<br><br>Ca=
rlos</div></div></div>

--0000000000006520f8064d0c89bc--