Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:47978
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.219 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=Wh8beSgIEAQTXQlI/9P1L3hfA+A9q5phQE9Dx9aa3H25pqCceofeqQHR2QLAnhmOhX
         JXVGwzjhFcA87r/mp+aT9ktTl2ozeVwiiei2qAkPic0ara8DWf42IxgoCfRssw8nMw9s
         vb0qlIzAs4AMOr7AzT+wVlkcFQAievjjU1wyM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1004151207180.8571@kossu.derickrethans.nl>
References: <6E76B52E-7543-4F09-A948-A7910513B548@gmail.com>
	 <4BA102F2.1000405@mageekbox.net>
	 <62279C8B-4E50-47DE-B682-EE8152084433@gmail.com>
	 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003171650100.4153@kossu.derickrethans.nl>
	 <E3B88BFD-45C8-43B0-BE31-913290C75AB6@gmail.com>
	 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003171809030.4153@kossu.derickrethans.nl>
	 <4C492F0D-E503-433A-BE21-E1A42777E4B0@gmail.com>
	 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1004120920360.8571@kossu.derickrethans.nl>
	 <A79C6711-FCE3-4380-B3AC-98A47B77D641@gmail.com>
	 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1004151207180.8571@kossu.derickrethans.nl>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:46:55 +0100
Message-ID: <j2td3ada2bf1004150446q2866bf4cnb31ef4c86f54e38e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>
Cc: Felix De Vliegher <felix.devliegher@gmail.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>, 
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Johannes_Schl=FCter?= <johannes@schlueters.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] array_seek function
From: petercowburn@gmail.com (Peter Cowburn)

2010/4/15 Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010, Felix De Vliegher wrote:
>
>> >>>> Update: http://phpbenelux.eu/array_seek-return.patch.txt
>> >>>> I've kept the fseek()-style return values (0 when fine, -1 when seek fails)
>> >>>
>> >>> Any reason why you picked that over the (IMO more logical) true/false
>> >>> approach?
>> >>
>> >> No, it makes more sense to use the boolean return values, I was just
>> >> using your fseek() analogy. Although I still find it useful to return
>> >> the seeked value, and false when seek fails (basically how next(),
>> >> reset() and friends behave).
>> >
>> > Has this been added to trunk now? Or not yet?
>>
>> No, still have it lying around. Can I commit this?
>
> Dunno... did you go with true/false in the end, or returning the value?
> I just realize that in the latter case you wouldn't be able to see
> whether the seek actually worked, because every value could be a
> "correct" value. I'd prefer the true/false thing still because of that.

I realise that I'm late to the game here but do have a couple of thoughts.
* The function name: this will go hand-in-hand with functions like
current(), next(), prev(), key(), reset() rather than the other
array_* functions... wouldn't "seek" be more appropriate given its
siblings?
* The return value: the purpose of the function is to seek, not to get
what is at the seeked-to position (right?) so true/false (+ warning?)
makes most sense to me.

>
> Derick
>
> --
> http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org
> Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php
> twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>