Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:95631
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.48 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADqTB_gmgU8ax-zKCV2t0ecsaZjijS-U37UL0hhp4JFK=VsSQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKC-LS2iLjXHbVPAuk4J_uN0d1syc1-oxgUmwVS257uX5s1bdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAObuZdtOdgp54_9M5=tfGBChFn4gc+GKNrOxConcM23FSD6PUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANUQDCh5inZjeBusG0Joz425zHtXYpExxFsMit7DtU=9uV71=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEsg9X3frqCCiwmiiMKr0SO577X8PC21B0PSpR4Q6NL_hOwgJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANUQDChrXRXAhy37msW13uYUJNzuxuJixrd0a8Uop9nWQ=O2kQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADqTB_gmgU8ax-zKCV2t0ecsaZjijS-U37UL0hhp4JFK=VsSQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 00:02:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKC-LS1tJXTA_H79rhu98GC1UnHBXCUry0_eJOzTjnXZHY7Dwg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk>
Cc: Niklas Keller <me@kelunik.com>, David Rodrigues <david.proweb@gmail.com>, 
	Ryan Pallas <derokorian@gmail.com>, "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143ae42d6592b053bbd4329
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] optionally return class name from gettype
From: abacaphiliac@gmail.com (Timothy Younger)

--001a1143ae42d6592b053bbd4329
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

thank you all for your feedback. it seems this thread is split between an
optional param and a new function, so i created a new function called
var_type for comparison.

commit:
https://github.com/abacaphiliac/php-src/commit/eca6f77bf2744c79671d1dfbb641b753503d4a1a

build:
https://travis-ci.org/abacaphiliac/php-src/builds/157555638

it mirrors gettype except that it returns a classname instead of the string
"object". i'm not a fan of the code duplication, so i'm looking into a
couple of ways to address that. the result will likely couple var_type to
gettype, but that is no worse than my optional param solution. is decoupled
code better than code duplication in this scenario?

does comparing my commits help? how can i proceed? should i open merge
requests that reference each other to see if either one is acceptable, or
if they need work? should i submit an RFC that includes both commits so
that there can be a vote?

thanks for your time and honest feedback.

On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 5:46 AM, Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk> wrote:

> I agree, an argument that essentially turns it into a different function
> is not a good practice.
>
> Suggestions for a function-name?
>
> typeof() or vartype() maybe?
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 8:17 PM, Niklas Keller <me@kelunik.com> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > Niklas Keller wrote:
>> > > I'm not sure on the boolean through, I think a new function might be
>> > better.
>> >
>> > In this point I desagree.
>> > I think that boolean is the best way, mainly to avoid a new function
>> > on userland.
>> > It's like an "extension" for gettype(), and make senses just extend it.
>>
>>
>> The issue is that it's not clear what this boolean means just from reading
>> the code.
>> If you follow Clean Code, you shouldn't have something like that, only in
>> very, very rare cases.
>>
>
>

--001a1143ae42d6592b053bbd4329--