Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:59144
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender)
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 11:57:38 +0100
To: internals@lists.php.net
Message-ID: <20120324115738.04fa708b@coriolan>
In-Reply-To: <4F6CB50D.2060804@sugarcrm.com>
References: <20120323172608.3672eec8@coriolan>
	<4F6CB50D.2060804@sugarcrm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Validate complex types
From: francois.gannaz@gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?B?RnJhbudvaXM=?= Gannaz)

Hi

On 2012-03-23, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>=20
> > I wanted to use `zend_parse_arg()` to validate a single parameter if the
> > first call to `zend_parse_parameters_ex()` wasn't successful. But this
> > function is never used outside of "Zend/zend_API.c". Is it meant for pu=
blic
> > use? Are there any drawbacks in calling it?
>=20
> No, it's currently not meant for public use - it's an internal function
> that is not available to outside modules (thus declared 'static').
> It may make sense to refactor this code and make it more accessible to
> functions that want to parse individual parameter, but currently it is
> not suited for that.

Thanks. As I'm new to php-src, it takes some time to understand this kind of
(undocumented?) conventions. I know it's a tedious task, but I'd really enj=
oy a
few comments for the Zend API functions.

> I would rather do it differently - I'd allow to run parse on a single
> parameter, i.e. have initial parse with 'z' and then depending on some co=
de
> have something like:
>=20
>    zend_parse_single_arg(my_arg, "l", &l)=20
>=20
> So you could do your own checks and then still benefit from the clean API
> provided by parameter parser.

This is something you wrote on github, but I took the liberty to insert it =
here
as it is related. I thought `zend_parse_arg()` could be a substitute of your
`zend_parse_single_arg()`. It cannot be. So, is it worth adding this functi=
on
to the API? My own answer is yes, of course, but it does count much.

--
Fran=E7ois Gannaz