Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:61796
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)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.0 \(1485\))
In-Reply-To: <CAKZjf5SFhswNibL=A-zQR0SdhTt-+Yr-GE0GO6AQ-bht=EhQXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 01:31:47 +0300
Cc: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>,
 Dave Ingram <dave@dmi.me.uk>,
 PHP Development <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <7544BE6A-7754-4303-BBCF-3D561FD82963@gmail.com>
Uza8GE6Q-D3aAoQ94NEpcutquM+svj+VbA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKZjf5SFhswNibL=A-zQR0SdhTt-+Yr-GE0GO6AQ-bht=EhQXQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Aulbach <alex.aulbach@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1485)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Generators in PHP
From: g.b.yahav@gmail.com (Yahav Gindi Bar)


On 26 =D7=91=D7=99=D7=95=D7=9C 2012, at 01:22, Alex Aulbach =
<alex.aulbach@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2012/7/25 Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>:
>> particular with namespaced code). So if you have some kind of
>> Code\Generator class, you're screwed.
>> Keywords don't grow on trees, you know ;)
>=20
> Hm. Ok, thats a problem.
> Oh, man, do I really have to find a good keyword myself? Maybe we
> should use a password-generator. :)
> Seriously, how's about
>=20
>         yielder hugo() { ... yield ...}
>=20
> Feels right, but my native language is not english, so I risk to make
> me a fool. I think that also names what it really is: A yielder yields
> something. In this case: An iterator yielder yields an iteration. I
> think I would like that.
> And the word is per sure not common. :)
> Ahmm, if you don't like it, would you be so kind to make a suggestion? =
TNX
>=20
>> Also I'd like to point out that being similar to other languages is =
in
>> the general case a *good* thing. So if you say "It doesn't matter how
>=20
> In general I agree. For PHP I do not. This case is a little bit
> different, because the targets are self-explaining and simplicity.
>=20
>> Deviating from the
>> "standard" generator implementation without having good reasons seems
>> rather pointless to me.
>=20
> But I gave good other reasons. :)
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Conclusion:
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>=20
> Fact: generator is not a good keyword, because too common.
>=20
> Answer: I made a new sugestion with the keyword "yielder".
>=20
> Fact: in general it's a good idea to implement features, like in other
> languages.
>=20
> A: Correct, but
>=20
> Fact: PHP has different architectural targets which doesn't mean to
> make everything different, but ...
> Experience: in this case I'm sure, it's not the best way to make it
> like any other language.
> Experience: If you have enough reasons to make things different, don't
> look too much how others are doing.
> Experience: Most PHP-programmers are not so experienced like most
> programmers in other languages.
> (Can't be proven, but I would bet for it.)
>=20
> --=20
> Alex Aulbach
>=20
> --=20
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>=20

Wow, I wasn't near my computer for the last day and I see that the =
conversation really grew ;)
"yielder" sounds quite weird don't you think (but my native language is =
not English too.. so don't blame me at english stupid conclusions!)

> Fact: generator is not a good keyword, because too common.
I can't see the connection... people relate the generator keyword to the =
iterators so what's the problem using it?

what about using the "iterator" name as generators keyword? because it =
does return iterators...

iterator foo() { ... yield $bar; ... } sounds OK for me... and got a =
meaning too.
though it can confuse some people with the original iterators...

BTW: I still don't think that the generators need a unique word and I =
suggest using functions, but I didn't read al the mails chain, so I =
assume that I'll find there the answer.=