Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79526
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)
To: "'Josh Watzman'" <jwatzman@fb.com>,
	"'PHP internals'" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <95A581EE-A062-4926-BE44-BCA87FC9B356@fb.com> <000b01d01494$bb1c6520$31552f60$@tutteli.ch>
In-Reply-To: <000b01d01494$bb1c6520$31552f60$@tutteli.ch>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 17:20:14 +0100
Message-ID: <000c01d01495$2e566180$8b032480$@tutteli.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQLlQZUb/bhxOgCXUpI56Nr+ETsclgEczmegmlXAJ3A=
Content-Language: de-ch
Subject: AW: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullsafe calls
From: php@tutteli.ch ("Robert Stoll")

> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Robert Stoll [mailto:php@tutteli.ch]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Dezember 2014 17:17
> An: 'Josh Watzman'; 'PHP internals'
> Betreff: AW: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullsafe calls
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Josh Watzman [mailto:jwatzman@fb.com]
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Dezember 2014 00:08
> > An: PHP internals
> > Betreff: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Nullsafe calls
> >
> > Hey internals! A useful feature that Hack picked up in the last few
> > months are "nullsafe calls", a way of propagating
> failure
> > forward in a series of chained method calls to the end of the whole
> > computation, getting rid of a lot of the
> boilerplate in the
> > middle. I think the feature would be a good one for PHP as well, so
> > I'm submitting this RFC to add it -- you can see
> the RFC
> > itself for a full discussion of the motivation for the feature, as =
well as the feature itself:
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/nullsafe_calls
> >
> > Josh Watzman
> >
> >
> > --
> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe,
> > visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>=20
> First of all, I like the RFC, I think as well that it is a useful =
feature for PHP and I already have it on my wish
list
> ;)
>=20
> Yet, either I misunderstand the section about short circuiting or I =
propose to change the behaviour.
>=20
> "If $obj is null, when $obj?->foo(..) executes, the arguments will =
still be evaluated."
>=20
> IMO that is wrong. It should not evaluate the arguments since the =
nullsafe operator (sometimes called "safe
navigation"
> operator in other languages - which is the better wording IMO, maybe =
change it? But that is just a detail) is just
syntactic
> sugar for making the call only if $bj is not null. So the following:
>=20
> $obj =3D null;
> $obj?->foo($a, $b);
>=20
> should be the same as
>=20
> $obj =3D null;
> If($obj !=3D=3D null){
>  $obj->foo($a, $b);
> }
>=20
> hence PHP will not complain that $a and $b where not defined.
>=20
>=20
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, =
visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Appendum: I somehow skipped the section "Prior Art". So I see, that the =
different behaviour was on purpose. I do not
think it is a clever idea to implement a common concept differently. In =
this sense -1
Changing the RFC and implementing it the same way others do +1