Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:72842
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.182 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5309BE29.4020100@lsces.co.uk>
References: <3930601.eOsJ67jUeD@dagon>
	<3095034.S38469PJ60@dagon>
	<CA0C1888-942C-4461-997D-1CB976F13A01@ajf.me>
	<4283043.OsXFhf6CrZ@rofl>
	<81C4C9DF-CE14-4779-A442-88F29EA39F78@ajf.me>
	<5309BE29.4020100@lsces.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 13:44:48 +0100
Message-ID: <CAB6YZux=MPQW3Ckfzwr5CuR6HqFthvS1s9ySEi1RFF2iE4nHMg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Named params status
From: pajousek@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pavel_Kou=C5=99il?=)

As a userland developer, I would love to see named parameters. They
are IMHO a much better way to achieve optional parameters skipping
than the "skipparams" RFC.

Also the named parameters look more "future-compatible" if PHP ever
added things like method overloading (which would be great, but that's
for another discussion).

As for the "majority of users don't want it implemented"; I would
probably say otherwise, because most people I spoke with really MISS
named parameters in PHP.


Pavel Kouril

On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:
> Andrea Faulds wrote:
>>
>> I know. I asked Nikita about this on IRC about a month or two ago. I thi=
nk
>> he said he just didn=E2=80=99t want to deliver an incomplete feature?
>
> The RFC says that Nikita will not work on it if there is no demand. I am
> seeing many people do want it but personally this is another large bloat
> that I see little point to so should there not at least be some vote on
> whether it IS worth Nikita's time if the majority of users don't want it
> implemented? Having been through a major exercise bringing this under
> control using array parameters for variable data I don't want to have to
> start coping with yet another passing mechanism as third party libraries
> 'adopt new practices'!
>
> Since this RFC also pulls in other RFC's should the whole roadmap on this=
 be
> part of the developing plan for PHP6? Deciding what areas are actually wo=
rth
> people spending time on. Certainly if parameter names are to evolve to us=
e
> UTF-8 strings, this should be part of the development plan?
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -----------------------------
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=3Dcontact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
> Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>