Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:60684 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 84425 invoked from network); 29 May 2012 00:28:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 May 2012 00:28:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.155 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.155 smtp155.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.155] ([67.192.241.155:40775] helo=smtp155.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 9A/80-13113-61814CF4 for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 20:28:07 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp32.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 8F092503BD; Mon, 28 May 2012 20:28:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp32.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 41F26503B1; Mon, 28 May 2012 20:28:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4FC41815.3060306@sugarcrm.com> Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 17:28:05 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gustavo Lopes CC: "internals@lists.php.net" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_part() From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > I've opened the array_part() vote: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_part#vote > > The vote asks whether the branch at > https://github.com/cataphract/php-src/tree/array_part should be merged. > This implementation has been tested and has 100% code coverage on the > reachable code. This looks very complicated. It might be that some use cases require this level of complexity, but I can't remember a case where I would need it. That alone does not disqualify the proposal, but I personally very much like having something like array_column() rather than whole array slicing engine with it's own declarative language inside. The engine might be fine, but I imagine many users would want just something like array_column() - so at least it'd be nice to have both. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227