Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:72243
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com from 209.85.212.179 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c-TK25XtgNz7DamgYZP6aNYgoXfuDimErZARhci8W1qgw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <52EE2B66.4040005@pthreads.org>
	<CAGa2bXYJT+qXRXinxd_hqgPG0UfWkvCH0f6sgLyzSjM2X57j0g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALtuQzAt_FaZwQpfJM9ed1JJSQAWb2bgP=R+hQfnVkZxZLpREw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXa5zON7-A6LST7yyWBrJ8ZKP7eeSSiQM-DpqNbOnrdveA@mail.gmail.com>
	<52F157BE.3020804@ajf.me>
	<CAGa2bXafeGSQ1X7TUsQYnnASqyBPjyT1nh=yPM9LdbW3nY3Gmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<52F15FD6.7060901@ajf.me>
	<CAGa2bXZvEN0KULW3MBR6y+wFKDiHOw7dXqsBeMZVYNNAXXYg2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXYLkvdPXGcC=G93EKQPUBxCCKLcx-FHUK3Kt8NasD5Cvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF+90c-TK25XtgNz7DamgYZP6aNYgoXfuDimErZARhci8W1qgw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 10:55:34 +0400
Message-ID: <CA+9eiLviGkhSbGSZ=hw1BkJjJYBOuzAmmzsTJu=YNERwJYdDaA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Cc: Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>, Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044283b050637104f1a33eb6
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RE: RFC: expectations/assertions
From: dmitry@zend.com (Dmitry Stogov)

--f46d044283b050637104f1a33eb6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

exectly :)

Thanks. Dmitry.


On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:
> >
> > > php > assert('function() {return FALSE;}');
> > > php > assert('function() {return TRUE;}');
> > >
> > > It does not work, but
> > >
> > > php > assert(eval('function() {return FALSE;};'));
> > >
> > > Warning: assert(): Assertion failed in php shell code on line 1
> > >
> > > so closure in eval() works. I don't see reason not to allow closure
> > > directly.
> > > It only seems inconsistent to me.
> > >
> >
> > Added this to inconsistent behaviors RFC to track.
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/inconsistent-behaviors#assert
> >
>
> There is a difference between f() and 'f'. The former is a function call,
> the latter a callback. The eval-behavior non-withstanding assert is
> essentially if (!$arg1) { error($arg2); }. So if (!f()) { ... } makes a lot
> of sense, but if (!function() {}) {} makes zero sense. Again, function() {}
> only creates a callback, but does *not* run it. To run it, you'd need
> something like (function(){})().
>
> There is no inconsistency here. Allowing callables in general is not
> compatible with the existing string-eval mode and the expectation that
> arrays will assert true if they are non-empty. Adding only closures, *that*
> is inconsistent.
>
> Nikita
>

--f46d044283b050637104f1a33eb6--