Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71172
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain tutteli.ch designates 80.74.154.78 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <20140116110127.202079vzjsj76n7b@webmail.tutteli.ch>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 11:01:27 +0100
To: Martin Keckeis <martin.keckeis1@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>,
  Crypto Compress <cryptocompress@googlemail.com>,
  PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References:  <CABDNdAGCH5i9-=4Ys1CXeNaGWGmX=mkTiq0b7BbUKtBPdQ9XVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <001301cf1227$6d082ab0$47188010$@tutteli.ch>
 <CABDNdAHZTcE09kS-r_XTGOE9Q5EjTsEQyvzd29q0_nUqnPRrfQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF9U7z-qR-JnXmbuS-ok2NnB_QzecM1Z4MGhek77rktdSYmcmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADyq6s+KqD4Sp00NcJKDAAxX+xWT4x1C3_D1zMVqZ1PRKf__9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <002d01cf1234$01e6dc60$05b49520$@tutteli.ch>
 <CABDNdAEAQyyLQXFw3tw8S9Rb=+9Z-k1K_geX6HG7x1reCoJ5Rw@mail.gmail.com>
 <004c01cf123d$35730870$a0591950$@tutteli.ch>
 <52D71748.1090402@googlemail.com> <52D71FAE.8030002@ajf.me>
 <005001cf124f$3a40df00$aec29d00$@tutteli.ch>
 <CAEp07h_KDafvOMzxVmgQq1XMeO_N3CWdFCN0vVgdxXtEn6imKg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:  <CAEp07h_KDafvOMzxVmgQq1XMeO_N3CWdFCN0vVgdxXtEn6imKg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8;
 DelSp="Yes";
 format="flowed"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.3.6)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Introducing "Array Of" RFC
From: php@tutteli.ch

> + 1 for the RFC
>
> But if i'm not completely wrong, there is performance decrease instead of
> increase in your tests?
> https://gist.github.com/krakjoe/8444591
>
> [joe@fiji php-src]$ sapi/cli/php isTest.php 10000
> objects: 10000
> arrayof:        0.00645113
> instanceof:     0.00560713

I gave the RFC a few more thoughts and came to the conclusion that it  
does not fit to PHP (due to the performance penalties involved).
The syntax merely hide an ugly design. If you would write the same in  
normal PHP then probably everyone would agree that it is bad design.
Following an example (doesn't really make sense but outlines the bad design)

function foo(Foo[] $foos){
    if(count($foos) > 0){
       $a = array_pop($foos);
       //do something
      foo($foos);
    }
}

Is equivalent to

function foo(array $arr){
    foreach($arr as $v){
       if(!($v instanceof Foo)){
          //trigger_error
       }
    }
    if(count($foos) > 0){
       $a = array_pop($foos);
       //do something
      foo($foos);
    }
}

The check adds runtime complexity to the function for each call which  
is obviously not necessary (once would be good enough). And I doubt  
that users would actually make sure that the check is only performed  
once and even if you would argue that one should write it as follows:

function bar(Foo[] $foos){
    foo($foos);
}
function foo(array $foos){
    if(count($foos) > 0){
       $a = array_pop($foos);
       //do something
      foo($foos);
    }
}

Then it is still bad design compared to a collection which actually  
does the check during the addition of elements.
Although, I like the effort to make PHP somewhat more type safe I am  
-1 for this RFC, the implementation respectively. If we want typed  
arrays then the array needs to carry the type to be efficient.