Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:82247
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 209.85.220.176 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAL=_i_m78Zo5euReKsvFfrLknFq7KEzoNnrrBefC987u+=+yHQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+9eiLuNjTa8JzBgnZE5iuv5BZ4Kw4Ehk1ivxPUetNSmZ43JMw@mail.gmail.com>
	<54D7ED22.3080001@gmail.com>
	<CA+9eiLvn7BzfG5N+5Oca8pVO1OTzN9=jWof6NrVDfxvvu-XqPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL=_i_m78Zo5euReKsvFfrLknFq7KEzoNnrrBefC987u+=+yHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:01:45 +0400
Message-ID: <CA+9eiLuUFiKwOR-BqQEmkQirpAMxgb0GE70Zz7h4WDsd1Me8FQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org>
Cc: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>, 
	PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11339f8a136728050ea40580
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Design by Contract
From: dmitry@zend.com (Dmitry Stogov)

--001a11339f8a136728050ea40580
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Usage of "return" is a good idea.
The more heads the better result :)

Thanks. Dmitry.

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org> wrote:

> Morning internals,
>
>     I really liked the original idea Dmitry had, with the D-ish syntax.
>
>    We could use require and return like:
>
>     function foo()
>         require(input-expr)
>         return(output-expr) {
>         /* ... */
>     }
>
>     to avoid adding more keywords.
>
>     I'd really appreciate seeing this as an option in the RFC.
>
> Cheers
> Joe
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
>
>> It's nothing wrong here. It's just a concept that cares about constraints
>> definition more.
>>
>> So, DbC with asserts spread among the code is like OOP without classes.
>>
>> Thanks. Dmitry.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 2:11 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > > Following our conversation, I tried to imagine how DbC should look
>> like
>> > in
>> > > PHP from user perspective. Finally, I was influenced by the semantic
>> > > proposed in D, and syntax proposed for Java. So, these are my initial
>> > > thoughts:
>> > >
>> > > For php it may look like the following:
>> > >
>> > > function foo()
>> > >     requre(<input-assert-expression>)
>> > >     ensure(<output-assert-expression>)
>> > > {
>> > >   ...
>> > > }
>> >
>> > Why not do it simpler?
>> >
>> > function foo() {
>> > // require
>> > assert(<input-assert-expression>);
>> > ...
>> > // ensure
>> > assert(<output-assert-expression>);
>> > }
>> >
>> > I'm oversimplifying a bit, but in general, why we need more places to
>> > have code in the function than the actual code of the function? It would
>> > be harder to parse, to read, to maintain, to debug, to profile, etc. and
>> > I'm not sure what exactly it provides that can't be done by plain
>> > regular code inside the function.
>> >
>> > If we're concerned about the costs of assert, we could make special
>> > provision in the compiler for zero-cost asserts. It doesn't require
>> > moving code out of the function.
>> > --
>> > Stas Malyshev
>> > smalyshev@gmail.com
>> >
>>
>
>

--001a11339f8a136728050ea40580--