Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85302
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.54 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAn=CzVkTCo=6Qaxh88nQFiwVhv_h_YBORsK-BBD3+C9PqqcQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAn=CzWySWQU1D93WA7L2eHvd31zogekEHmDUOsN7P6kBK4VrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<550B5A81.1090706@gmail.com>
	<CAAn=CzUZPo=Yy79pRbot58nSR_tFqKYpd53kaAMbfxyUvz9Lwg@mail.gmail.com>
	<550B7189.4040608@gmail.com>
	<CAAn=CzUQc-av2dVBKwQg5xsCDiUXszfP1fWKVpBRMFNA3SjYEA@mail.gmail.com>
	<7486C296-7535-4633-AFE2-02E7BBC67BC5@gmail.com>
	<CAAn=CzXR=cU8Pq4wzNQXKLhqDt9WOF3CJfk2B=3z8DBtQhVvCg@mail.gmail.com>
	<550C1176.9050307@gmail.com>
	<CAAn=CzWzKXSW0m+CrjzAT+Lq-j07M_V-WnBAvwSDhqLKCo=OiA@mail.gmail.com>
	<550C1AE4.8090607@gmail.com>
	<CAAn=CzXoEwOnSZ+uVgAZMmdT4hxLSoiQWb9fYVs4XJbp2AJnpA@mail.gmail.com>
	<550C1EC3.8000106@gmail.com>
	<CAAn=CzXwPH-PnKg9tgFqcrU0k_iKPjDzMPqu6TtGKJCyFPCQ=w@mail.gmail.com>
	<550C317E.8020508@gmail.com>
	<CAAn=CzUV+qYcJmUinGDOGaDYODz2dgidG7HD-6VCEf_bm0La8w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPwsocEuhUK5yzzfXhEwUh=-fgkd6TXZCeVPHcf5oyLUsooaqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAn=CzVkTCo=6Qaxh88nQFiwVhv_h_YBORsK-BBD3+C9PqqcQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 16:17:21 +0000
Message-ID: <CAPwsocFHJx9TrvRAZu609Ntakh172NRYghwbzFPT8So5bF4YbQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Bowers <bowersbros@gmail.com>
Cc: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf30334b77ac25720511baa6ba
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC - Array slice syntactic sugar
From: leight@gmail.com (Leigh)

--20cf30334b77ac25720511baa6ba
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Mar 20, 2015 4:00 PM, "Alex Bowers" <bowersbros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> IMHO, stick to offsets in the first instance, this is a slice notation,
first order of business is to make it behave like array_slice (+on
strings). Assoc key based slicing feels pretty wrong to me at this point.
>
>
> I have to agree, we are getting ahead of ourselves.
>
> A quick summary of what this RFC should cover:
>
> - Slicing an array or string based on the positional index.
>
> Things for future RFC consideration:
>
> - Slicing an array or string based on the key.
> - Index -1 for last item of list.
>
> Everybody agree that the only focus of this RFC should be the positional
index slicing?

I think that's plenty for initial scope, since at this point proposals are
targeting 7.1 there's plenty of time to get assoc indexing in if there is
enough support for this in the first instance.

If there is support for positional but not assoc, we don't want this
proposal to fail on the fact they are bundled together.

Not sure I understand your index -1 line (sorry, on phone in pub, really
just skimming mails). If you mean negative indices for positions from the
end of the array/string then +1 for this *with* the slice syntax.

For $thing[-1] I think this only works for strings (and I have this
implemented, should probably RFC it)
https://github.com/lt/php-src/tree/string_negative_offset

$thing[-1:] is in scope for arrays though

--20cf30334b77ac25720511baa6ba--