Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90689
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E4.B4.20254.FE84C965@pb1.pair.com>
References: <3B.E6.32157.D3DFA965@pb1.pair.com>
	<CAEYWF=4WxsKi6KdWtswvKUS=rQ=7A0e8qEtja9tZUoMsgwHcEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<E4.B4.20254.FE84C965@pb1.pair.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:54:24 +0700
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU7+XjDGiw8t9ZJO99Rk+NJ2NcxZAcxvaG5KyA7B4Z5Bqg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Allow specifying keys in list()
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

hi Andrea,

I very much like this proposal. Good work as usual!

The only part where I think we should not rely on list is the future
scope. I can see the logic that leads to use list for named arguments.
However I really think it is a very different topic and having to use
list to define arguments, it sounds like a hack to solve another long
due feature. Anyway, as it is not part of this RFC, I will ignore it
for now :)

Keep the good work,

Cheers,
Pierre

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
> Hi Bishop,
>
>
> Bishop Bettini wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Here's an RFC that would extend the syntax of list() to be more useful
>>> with associative arrays:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/list_keys
>>>
>>> Please read it and tell me your thoughts.
>>>
>>
>> Nice, Andrea, thanks! Destructuring is quite handy.
>>
>> I wonder if there is opportunity to include array gathering. Something
>> along the lines of:
>>
>> list ('foo' => $foo, ...$rest) = [ 'foo' => 1, 'bar' => 2, 'baz' => 3];
>> assert $foo === 1;
>> assert $rest === [ 'bar' => 2, 'baz' => 3];
>>
>> What do you think?
>
>
> That might be useful, and it's certainly intuitive. In languages with linked
> lists like Haskell, you can pattern-match the rest of a list, so there's a
> precedent. Though with linked lists it's an O(1) operation, while this is
> O(n).
>
> I don't think that should go into this RFC specifically, though, but it
> could be a future enhancement.
>
>
> Thanks!
> --
> Andrea Faulds
> https://ajf.me/
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>



-- 
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org