Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:61698
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.160.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4024424F-2D65-41EA-8E18-B2B8FCE94754@gmail.com>
References: <CAOhuFvYD8FQw=xbK3hFqi4GYkOvCNzWjuhk2fqwBjKG9n2kuuQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKZjf5T517=_fmrTRo78y4G8cM8-E1jbXfLcN3Z8H44mBjg9rQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+Ky_uMv7HN44oXK29XtQNQLyFSn_rPb5jOrDyJrXFau30=LWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKZjf5T8o-TBcur=+wQH7d_HfRDVJHuvn4oCFHo4xv0cGXU5Gg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4024424F-2D65-41EA-8E18-B2B8FCE94754@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 19:15:35 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKZjf5Tgij9PraeJ_W7qNwEbGtxcdONRDG48-w8e7EyGCZ4VYA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yahav Gindi Bar <g.b.yahav@gmail.com>
Cc: Galen Wright-Watson <ww.galen@gmail.com>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Implicit isset in ternary operator
From: alex.aulbach@gmail.com (Alex Aulbach)

2012/7/24 Yahav Gindi Bar <g.b.yahav@gmail.com>:
> I don't think global operators is good idea since it can make a script very complex and you'll have to learn many operators in case the one who wrote it decided to make it "operator driven"

On the other hand: If those operators aren't global, then they are
local. I wouldn't like that much more, because inside "your project"
you will then never know, if and how an operator is currently working.
Much more confusion.

But I wouldn't like to see this operator-stuff using in a "normal"
context, in "normal" PHP-scripts. (What's normal?)

I see those operators in a very limited context, e.g. when you create
output (use PHP as template-engine), then they could be extremly
helpful. Always and alyways repeating things, which can't be made
shorter. For example checking the rights of a user:

set_operator_handler('r', function ($user, $current) {
    ....
    if (!$userrRights->userHasRights($username, $current)) {
         throw userRightsException(....)
    }
}

and in the code:

try {
     $user ?r: $current;
} catch
....

Ugly? Yes!!! Very! But that's wanted, because - as said - in very
special context. [But really? You can read the code as: "Has the user
the rights for current?"]

In the end this is a design-decision. I wouldn't recomend this for the
normal work (as shown above) and I think the said should be part of
the documentation - if it is really implemented. But I think in some
very special contexts this could be really helpful.


> However, if we're talking about operators, I do think that adding operator override option (for the regular operators, such as +, -, * etc.) will be great for OOP - but that's a different topic.

Existing operators shouldn't be changeable. My suggestion is the
"PHP-way" of operator driven development for a very special problem,
which is making very repeating but complex things very short, nothing
else. :)

Or in other words: In detail it's great, but in general it's a very
bad idea. :) That's just wanted and if you think you must use it, then
you should have a good reason.

-- 
Alex Aulbach