# New String Function: str_replace_limit - Thread: https://externals.io/message/61253 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/61253 - Started by Paul Dragoonis on 2012-07-15T19:45:16+00:00 - Messages: 8 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #61253 — Paul Dragoonis — 2012-07-15T19:45:16+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/61253#61253 Hey, I'm proposing to add a new function str_replace_limit, this will be identical to `str_replace()` with one key difference, you can specify how many times you want the replace to occur. Currently this isn't possible with any functions in the /ext/standard/string.c stack, the only easy workaround is using `preg_replace()` which requires of course the pcre library and regex patterns. I would have added this as a 4th param to `str_replace()`, but it already has a 4th by-ref param to tell you how many times it done the replacement. mixed str_replace_limit ( mixed $search , mixed $replace , mixed $subject [, int $limit ] ) Thoughts? Paul Dragoonis. --- ## #61254 — Felipe Pena — 2012-07-15T19:54:53+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/61253#61254 · In reply to: #61253 Hi, 2012/7/15 Paul Dragoonis : > Hey, > > I'm proposing to add a new function str_replace_limit, this will be > identical to `str_replace()` with one key difference, you can specify > how many times you want the replace to occur. > > Currently this isn't possible with any functions in the > /ext/standard/string.c stack, the only easy workaround is using > `preg_replace()` which requires of course the pcre library and regex > patterns. > > I would have added this as a 4th param to `str_replace()`, but it > already has a 4th by-ref param to tell you how many times it done the > replacement. > > mixed str_replace_limit ( mixed $search , mixed $replace , mixed > $subject [, int $limit ] ) > > Thoughts? > Surely a 5th param is preferred. -- Regards, Felipe Pena --- ## #61255 — Paul Dragoonis — 2012-07-15T19:59:10+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/61253#61255 · In reply to: #61254 The 4th param to str_replace is a by-ref param, so you can't just skip over it, can you ? > Hi, > > 2012/7/15 Paul Dragoonis : > > […] > > Surely a 5th param is preferred. > > -- > Regards, > Felipe Pena --- ## #61275 — Gustavo Lopes — 2012-07-16T08:05:02+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/61253#61275 · In reply to: #61255 > The 4th param to str_replace is a by-ref param, so you can't just > skip > over it, can you ? > I don't think so, but we could make it so that you could by using optional passing by reference. -- Gustavo Lopes --- ## #61276 — Kingsquare.nl - Robin Speekenbrink — 2012-07-16T08:08:34+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/61253#61276 · In reply to: #61275 Hi all, I'm a strict follower of this list and havent posted (as of yet) due to the fact that i'd like to be in the loop, but am not a C developer... :) But on this discussion i'd like to give my 2c: As a PHP developer i'd regret to see yet another function added to the language instead of adding a new parameter. (this it does the same thing just limited) Also with the other discussion on being able to skip default parameters (using the keyword 'default') this shouldnt be a problem should it? Thanks, i'll butt out now :D Op maandag 16 juli 2012 10:05:02, Gustavo Lopes schreef: > > > […] > > I don't think so, but we could make it so that you could by using > optional passing by reference. --- ## #61277 — Paul Dragoonis — 2012-07-16T08:29:17+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/61253#61277 · In reply to: #61276 Thanks for the comments guys, I like your idea about skipping the by-ref count parameter. If the 'default' keyword were to be added in, then you could skip the 4th parameter and add your 5th 'limit' option. $str = str_replace($search, $replace, $subject, default, 5); Does anyone have any objections on this implementation approach? (obviously we'd have to wait for the default param skipping to be implemented, I'm not sure on the implementation status of that feature) Thanks. Paul Dragoonis. On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Kingsquare.nl - Robin Speekenbrink wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm a strict follower of this list and havent posted (as of yet) due to the > fact that i'd like to be in the loop, but am not a C developer... :) > > But on this discussion i'd like to give my 2c: As a PHP developer i'd regret > to see yet another function added to the language instead of adding a new > parameter. (this it does the same thing just limited) Also with the other > discussion on being able to skip default parameters (using the keyword > 'default') this shouldnt be a problem should it? > > Thanks, i'll butt out now :D > > Op maandag 16 juli 2012 10:05:02, Gustavo Lopes schreef: > > > […] --- ## #61286 — Florian Anderiasch — 2012-07-16T11:23:43+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/61253#61286 · In reply to: #61277 > Thanks for the comments guys, I like your idea about skipping the > by-ref count parameter. > > If the 'default' keyword were to be added in, then you could skip the > 4th parameter and add your 5th 'limit' option. > > $str = str_replace($search, $replace, $subject, default, 5); > > Does anyone have any objections on this implementation approach? > (obviously we'd have to wait for the default param skipping to be > implemented, I'm not sure on the implementation status of that > feature) I'm not seeing what's the problem with it being a by-ref variable, as you've mentioned it twice now. Are you bothered by an additional variable being set in memory when skipping (i.e. not using it)? Or am I reading more into it than you tried to say? :) Greetings, Florian --- ## #61287 — Paul Dragoonis — 2012-07-16T11:30:39+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/61253#61287 · In reply to: #61286 On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Florian Anderiasch wrote: > > > […] > > I'm not seeing what's the problem with it being a by-ref variable, as > you've mentioned it twice now. Are you bothered by an additional > variable being set in memory when skipping (i.e. not using it)? Or am I > reading more into it than you tried to say? :) I believe you were reading more into it. I mention by-ref so it's easy to know if i'm talking about the existing or new proposed param. I'm not bothered by the by-ref param being skipped over to get to the 5th one, it's a hit I'm willing to take to achieve necessary functionality on `str_replace()`. If nobody has any further concerns I'll go ahead and create this new parameter and provide a PR on github accordingly. Paul Dragoonis. > > Greetings, > Florian