Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:77884 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 74233 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2014 22:47:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 11 Oct 2014 22:47:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ajf@ajf.me; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ajf@ajf.me; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 198.187.29.245 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 198.187.29.245 imap11-3.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [198.187.29.245] ([198.187.29.245:51616] helo=imap11-3.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 63/C3-43359-A83B9345 for ; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 18:47:39 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E5D8800DB; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 18:47:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at imap11.ox.privateemail.com Received: from mail.privateemail.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap11.ox.privateemail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id eJ3Ur4vPEX8J; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 18:47:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oa-res-26-28.wireless.abdn.ac.uk (oa-res-26-28.wireless.abdn.ac.uk [137.50.26.28]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A7278800CB; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 18:47:33 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) In-Reply-To: <5439B266.8070300@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:47:31 +0100 Cc: internals@lists.php.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <5439B266.8070300@gmail.com> To: Rowan Collins X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Deprecation of func_get_args(), call_user_func_array() and related API From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 11 Oct 2014, at 23:42, Rowan Collins wrote: > func_get_args() and func_num_args(), OTOH, existed solely to support = variadics, and anything taking advantage of them being functions rather = than a language structure would have to be quite exotic and arcane, so = in principle they could, eventually, be removed, but I agree with others = that it's far too soon to remove a feature which has been around since = 4.0 just becuase 5.6 includes a better alternative. They have some (admittedly limited) use beyond variadics. If you make a = function and later make it redirect to another, you can preserve your = typehints by using func_get_args() rather than using the =85 syntax. > If they're included in the core distribution, then why make them = optional at all? If it's just a question of how the functions behave, = then surely an included (and C-level) implementation should be sought = which has the better behaviour? This matches my own thoughts. There is nothing wrong with these = functions. There are just some issues with their implementation. We do = not need to get rid of the functions, that would be an absurd = overreaction. We should just fix the implementations. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/