Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:95458
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain daveyshafik.com from 209.85.220.173 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: me@daveyshafik.com
In-Reply-To: <15f26bd7-ccba-a193-7d4d-80343040fbe7@gmx.de>
References: <CANaX5nfGzFsYue8J6yUpNnEYzgUTGj2g-BMWsw1cyahPH=fmmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c_30gzmMXKT0XhZDaTK277uV5edStfka2YVE2ia0xpK9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <7cdd89c1-3fe5-3455-2f03-d5f6648d93d1@gmx.de> <CANaX5nfTifwbTmNYqZa2i728tCsWEOfadNeVBq5djNmK5fxPpw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ca7d2c2b-fa2a-532e-b0e3-b188a1cd79ec@gmx.de> <CAFMT4NrdOa9d3NwtriOqztHGY+g+yeeKB2s6yP0NCzVfh_jXHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <15f26bd7-ccba-a193-7d4d-80343040fbe7@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 21:20:47 +0800
Message-ID: <CANaX5ndn83M=kTpC2HSKTW8bQLbvR2etuoLr-8q78S7d+HE-OA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@gmx.de>
Cc: Levi Morrison <levim@php.net>, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e6328d0e908053b0d7fd1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Reverting "Too Few Arguments Exception" RFC
From: davey@php.net (Davey Shafik)

--001a114e6328d0e908053b0d7fd1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

FTR, I've created a second PR, without the changes to the array functions:

https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/2100

This way we can go either way.

- Davey

On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 1:57 AM, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de>
wrote:

> On 26.08.2016 at 16:48, Levi Morrison wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Finally, I wonder why array_diff(), for instance, even has an explicit
> >> check for ZEND_NUM_ARGS() and for Z_TYPE() != IS_ARRAY instead of
> >> properly invoking zend_parse_parameters() with "aa+" instead of "+" in
> >> the first place?  Maybe I'm missing something, but otherwise I would
> >> suggest to fix that altogether instead of piecemeal, even if that has to
> >> wait until 8.0.
> >
> > Well, its behavior does differ with a single array: it will preserve
> > keys in this case. If more than one array is passed it will
> > numerically index the keys starting at zero. This is the only reason I
> > can think of.
>
> Indeed, I've overlooked that array_diff() accepts a single array.  So,
> ZPP could use "aa*".  My point is that it's better to rely on common
> checks (and respective errors), than to have individual checks for each
> (group of) function(s).  If that had already been the case, we wouldn't
> need to have this discussion. :-)
>
> --
> Christoph M. Becker
>

--001a114e6328d0e908053b0d7fd1--