Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:66981
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain mindplay.dk from 209.85.220.178 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <A225D9BBF238624AB8DB155CC6466CCA0B57561F@VEXCHANGE10.zoo.lan>
References: <CADqTB_jjb9v=jZ_RkRucVvY6Vv1EOrqhJEqbcirhVV3ZgpG0vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.wu0woxzmc9evq2@nikita2206-n56vj>
	<CADqTB_i20MPuF=1rg0S+m8dPBwpmEWu_AwhaS1=c1KUQkvOHuw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEPJdum7pnhg1TwRv4FVp=Z41jOcr0UmsLw_L=qWHKN5vF_h-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADqTB_jra=fCh0UkZ5iCVgs5kJSqqQtytxg6Wucs6kh11_+b3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A225D9BBF238624AB8DB155CC6466CCA0B57561F@VEXCHANGE10.zoo.lan>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 08:50:20 -0400
Message-ID: <CADqTB_hYyezJ_mCNr=_PNRDX0=O=7e-STUF64qfvz2bqFr2imQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Bradley <Richard.Bradley@softwire.com>
Cc: Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d62649f3cb004d99c87ea
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] a couple of thoughts on the DateTime type debate
From: rasmus@mindplay.dk (Rasmus Schultz)

--047d7b5d62649f3cb004d99c87ea
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

> See the "Structs Tutorial" at msdn for a brief summary of structs in C# -
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa288471(v=vs.71).aspx

Looking at that code sample, yes - that is more or less exactly what I had
in mind.

I take back my last remark - I don't think the similarity in syntax is
confusing; what is confusing, is the way it works now... because there are
certain types that we just naturally think of as being values, not objects,
even if they have object syntax.

I don't know C very well, and I certainly don't know the PHP codebase very
well, but do you think it's feasible to internally piggyback structs on
arrays?

If structs were even somehow interchangeable with "real" arrays, that might
be a really useful side gain:







On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:01 AM, Richard Bradley <
Richard.Bradley@softwire.com> wrote:

> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de
> >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > structs as in c# don't have methods, however DateTime has them. so
> > > this doesn't work. What you can do is just pass all the data in the
> > > constructor and then don't change it, and you have your value type
> that is immutable.
> > > It just requires a bit self control.
> >
> > On 04 April 2013 23:59, Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk> wrote:
> >
> > You're right, struct isn't the right word - "value" is probably more
> accurate.
>
> Actually "structs" in C# can have methods. They are exactly classes with
> value type semantics (i.e. pass-by-value, like arrays in PHP).
>
> I think "struct" would be an ideal name for this feature, as this proposal
> matches the C# implementation very closely, and many people will be
> familiar with that.
>
> See the "Structs Tutorial" at msdn for a brief summary of structs in C# -
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa288471(v=vs.71).aspx
>
>
>
> Richard Bradley
> Tel : 020 7485 7500 ext 3230 | Fax : 020 7485 7575
>
> softwire
> Sunday Times Best Small Companies 2012 - 6th in the UK
> Web : www.softwire.com | Addr : 325 Highgate Studios, 53-79 Highgate
> Road, London NW5 1TL
> Softwire Technology Limited. Registered in England no. 3824658. Registered
> Office : 13 Station Road, London N3 2SB
>
>

--047d7b5d62649f3cb004d99c87ea--