Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84143
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: yohgaki@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAOsHV+uApxF=pQngonMppam2AEnW0Sm1ESAaB9exLH0K0hMBWA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOsHV+uApxF=pQngonMppam2AEnW0Sm1ESAaB9exLH0K0hMBWA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 13:43:33 +0900
Message-ID: <CAGa2bXYx-MGjhHVkDRYsHSRR4b+x4ba5PVxdhw9W2B1z0fWCEQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: marcio3w@gmail.com
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114737d0afa440051046de16
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV][RFC][DISCUSSION] Strict Argument Count
From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki)

--001a114737d0afa440051046de16
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi Marcio,

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Marcio Almada <marcio.web2@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm moving the "Strict Argument Count" RFC into discussion phase:
>
> RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/strict_argcount
> PR: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1108
>
> Many different opinions were collected during research phase and the RFC
> was updated with real BC break measurements and other important sections.
> So, before discussing:
>
>    - Even if you already read the RFC in the past, read it again now.
>    - Don't claim **possible** massive BC breaks before read the
>    measurements already done. No matter how seasoned you are with PHP, real
>    numbers matter most than assumptions. Your measurements are welcome too.
>    - Try the patch. Really.
>    - Consider reading the use case present on this post: goo.gl/3ykdIy
>    - Keep discussion on topic and remember we are all trying to improve PHP
>    in some way :)
>

I like the idea.

/** fn expects a variable-length argument lists */
function fn($arg) {
    $arg = func_get_arg();
    $args = func_get_args();
}

fn(1); // Ok
fn(...[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]); // Ok
call_user_func_array("fn", [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]); // Ok

I understand motivation why your patch behave like this. It's for BC, right?
However, isn't it better to declare variable length parameters by function
signature
in the long run?

function fn($arg, ...) {}

Is it possible to have E_DEPRECATED error without "..."?  and do not care
about func_get_arg*() existence? Make E_DEPRECATED error E_WARNING
in PHP 7.2 or 7.3.


Regards,

--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohgaki@ohgaki.net

--001a114737d0afa440051046de16--