# [VOTE]Call for voting: support use list in foreach - Thread: https://externals.io/message/62232 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/62232 - Started by Laruence on 2012-08-18T04:34:32+00:00 - Messages: 27 - RFC: foreach_variable supporting T_LIST (Implemented (PHP 5.5)) — https://externals.io/rfc/foreachlist.md - Page 1 of 2: messages 1 to 25 (25 per page, add `?page=N` to the URL) - Next page: https://externals.io/message/62232.md?page=2 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · RFCs at https://externals.io/rfc.md · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #62232 — Laruence — 2012-08-18T04:34:32+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62232 Hi: This feature introduces list() support in foreach constructs(more info can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/foreachlist). this could make the grammar more consistent, see following example: previous discussion could be found at : http://marc.info/?l=php-internals&m=134277050215818&w=2 please vote for this: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/foreachlist#vote thanks :) -- Laruence Xinchen Hui http://www.laruence.com/ --- ## #62235 — Nikita Popov — 2012-08-18T09:48:23+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62235 · In reply to: #62232 > Hi: > This feature introduces list() support in foreach constructs(more > info can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/foreachlist). > > please vote for this: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/foreachlist#vote Hi Lauruence! Is this vote just for list() or also for error suppression? I'd vote +1 on the first, but -1 on the second, so it would be nice to make it more clear ;) Nikita --- ## #62254 — Laruence — 2012-08-19T06:07:13+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62254 · In reply to: #62235 > > > […] > > Hi Lauruence! > > Is this vote just for list() or also for error suppression? I'd vote > +1 on the first, but -1 on the second, so it would be nice to make it > more clear ;) Hi, okey, I opened another vote for the foreach list with silent token supporting. thanks > > Nikita -- Laruence Xinchen Hui http://www.laruence.com/ --- ## #62277 — Sherif Ramadan — 2012-08-20T06:36:08+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62277 · In reply to: #62254 > > > […] > Hi, > > okey, I opened another vote for the foreach list with silent token > supporting. > > thanks > > > […] > > > Sorry, I feel like I missed the discussion phase of this RFC. I'm unclear about how this behavior in the construct will affect existing code. Currently, you can only use list() with arrays that have sequential numeric keys starting from 0. So the follow does not currently work with the list construct... list($x, $y) = array('x'=>1, 'y'=>2); // This won't work /* This won't work either.. at least not the way I'd expect because $y will end up being 1 and $x will be null and an `E_NOTICE` level error is thrown. */ list($x, $y) = array(1=>1, 2=>2); var_dump($x, $y); /* `NULL` int(1) */ While I see the use of the list construct as a minor improvement in readability (it does add some syntactic sugar), I also can't imagine that it makes things any more consistent, which is one of the points of this RFC. This also means that if we chose to avoid this extra level of indirection by way of list in foreach constructs we can't expect to access the key, which might make for another ambiguity and lead us back to just using something like the following... $array = array( 'Cape Cod' => array('lat' => 12.20, 'long' => 34.60), 'North Shore' => array('lat' => 18.72, 'long' => 4.11), 'Mount Erie' => array('lat' => 6.02, 'long' => 21.79), ); foreach ($array as $point => $coordinates) { $lat = $coordinates['lat']; $long = $coordinates['long']; echo "Coordinates for $point are: LAT = $lat, LONG = $long\n"; } I understand we can simply say this would not be an ideal use case for this, but then it becomes a tiny variation in syntax that only solves a specific problem. --- ## #62480 — Laruence — 2012-08-25T12:33:50+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62480 · In reply to: #62232 Hi: Voting closed. Result: foreach supports list syntax: 11 for yes, 4 for no. accepted. foreach supports list with silent token: 2 for yes, 10 for no. denied. thanks for your great advise. I will commit the patch later. thanks > Hi: > This feature introduces list() support in foreach constructs(more > info can be found here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/foreachlist). > > this could make the grammar more consistent, see following example: > > $users = array( > array('Foo', 'Bar'), > array('Baz', 'Qux'); > ); > > // Before > foreach ($users as $user) { > list($firstName, $lastName) = $user; > echo "First name: $firstName, last name: $lastName. "; > } > > // After > foreach ($users as list($firstName, $lastName)) { > echo "First name: $firstName, last name: $lastName. "; > } > ?> > > previous discussion could be found at : > http://marc.info/?l=php-internals&m=134277050215818&w=2 > > please vote for this: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/foreachlist#vote > > thanks :) > > -- > Laruence Xinchen Hui > http://www.laruence.com/ -- Laruence Xinchen Hui http://www.laruence.com/ --- ## #62481 — Andrew Faulds — 2012-08-25T12:36:46+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62481 · In reply to: #62480 > Hi: > Voting closed. > > Result: > foreach supports list syntax: 11 for yes, 4 for no. accepted. > foreach supports list with silent token: 2 for yes, 10 for no. denied. > > thanks for your great advise. > > I will commit the patch later. > > thanks > > > > […] > > Great, now I can do in PHP what I've been able to do in Python for years, but with uglier syntax! :P -- Andrew Faulds http://ajf.me/ --- ## #62510 — Stas Malyshev — 2012-08-26T17:42:27+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62510 · In reply to: #62480 Hi! > foreach supports list syntax: 11 for yes, 4 for no. accepted. > foreach supports list with silent token: 2 for yes, 10 for no. denied. And here's again the problem with this voting setup. With all these long discussions about people not getting votes we have 15 people that bothered to vote at all, and essentially the vote is decided by one or two single votes, and the vote doesn't even have to be from a PHP contributor - but the vote of anybody who can register on PHP wiki is enough to decide questions on the core of the language. And I'm not talking about "the voice of the masses" there but by a single vote of anybody who bothers to vote, which 99% of people just do not. I do not this it is a healthy state of things. Sorry to raise the topic that was discussed 1000 times before, but the situation does not seem to improve. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 --- ## #62511 — Yahav Gindi Bar — 2012-08-26T17:46:21+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62511 · In reply to: #62510 On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > […] > denied. > > And here's again the problem with this voting setup. With all these long > discussions about people not getting votes we have 15 people that > bothered to vote at all, and essentially the vote is decided by one or > two single votes, and the vote doesn't even have to be from a PHP > contributor - but the vote of anybody who can register on PHP wiki is > enough to decide questions on the core of the language. And I'm not > talking about "the voice of the masses" there but by a single vote of > anybody who bothers to vote, which 99% of people just do not. > > I do not this it is a healthy state of things. Sorry to raise the topic > that was discussed 1000 times before, but the situation does not seem to > improve. > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ > (408)454-6900 ext. 227 > > -- > > > > I got a PHP Wiki account but couldn't vote. Are you sure the Wiki accounts got the permissions to vote? --- ## #62512 — Stas Malyshev — 2012-08-26T17:48:35+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62512 · In reply to: #62511 Hi! > I got a PHP Wiki account but couldn't vote. Are you sure the Wiki > accounts got the permissions to vote? Hm... Not sure, maybe somebody has to enable it? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 --- ## #62514 — Nikita Popov — 2012-08-26T17:53:06+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62514 · In reply to: #62510 > Hi! > > > […] > > And here's again the problem with this voting setup. With all these long > discussions about people not getting votes we have 15 people that > bothered to vote at all, and essentially the vote is decided by one or > two single votes, and the vote doesn't even have to be from a PHP > contributor - but the vote of anybody who can register on PHP wiki is > enough to decide questions on the core of the language. And I'm not > talking about "the voice of the masses" there but by a single vote of > anybody who bothers to vote, which 99% of people just do not. Only people with a VCS account (or voting group) can vote. Nikita --- ## #62515 — Stas Malyshev — 2012-08-26T17:58:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62515 · In reply to: #62514 Hi! > Only people with a VCS account (or voting group) can vote. OK, I stand corrected then, but participation rate is still awfully low. We can't talk about consensus when everything is decided on one vote. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227 --- ## #62516 — Will Fitch — 2012-08-26T18:00:57+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62516 · In reply to: #62515 Maybe the simplest solution is we have a minimum participation rate before voting can be closed? On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > […] > > OK, I stand corrected then, but participation rate is still awfully low. > We can't talk about consensus when everything is decided on one vote. > > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ > (408)454-6900 ext. 227 --- ## #62517 — Yahav Gindi Bar — 2012-08-26T18:07:56+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62517 · In reply to: #62516 > Maybe the simplest solution is we have a minimum participation rate before > voting can be closed? > > Though it make sense - it's a problem, because it'll delay and reject some useful features because of requirements issue. > On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Stas Malyshev > […] > > > […] > +1 But giving vote for anybody is kind of bad idea too... so its a problem --- ## #62521 — Peter Cowburn — 2012-08-26T18:17:59+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62521 · In reply to: #62512 > > > […] > > Hm... Not sure, maybe somebody has to enable it? There is a special group ("voting" IIRC) for wiki accounts with voting rights. "Ordinary" (non-php.net) wiki account holders cannot vote. Someone with DB access would need to check, but I believe there are (were) only a couple of people in this special voting group. --- ## #62528 — Lester Caine — 2012-08-26T19:20:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62528 · In reply to: #62517 Yahav Gindi Bar wrote: > > […] > +1 > But giving vote for anybody is kind of bad idea too... so its a problem Currently how many people ARE entitled to vote anyway? And how many of those have been active in the last year? ( And how many here would like to be able to vote? ) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk --- ## #62529 — Yahav Gindi Bar — 2012-08-26T19:25:55+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62529 · In reply to: #62528 > Yahav Gindi Bar wrote: > > > […] > > Currently how many people ARE entitled to vote anyway? > And how many of those have been active in the last year? > > ( And how many here would like to be able to vote? ) > > -- > Lester Caine - G8HFL > ----------------------------- > Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=**contact > L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk > EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ > Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk > Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.**uk > > > > > -- > > > > From the recent voting, the average participates is 10... https://wiki.php.net/rfc/foreachlist https://wiki.php.net/rfc/apxs-loadmodule/results https://wiki.php.net/rfc/datetime_and_daylight_saving_time/vote https://wiki.php.net/rfc/finally https://wiki.php.net/rfc/constdereference I'd like! ;). (Though I've joined the group only month or two ago...) --- ## #62549 — Yasuo Ohgaki — 2012-08-27T01:43:10+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62549 · In reply to: #62515 2012/8/27 Stas Malyshev : > Hi! > > > […] > > OK, I stand corrected then, but participation rate is still awfully low. > We can't talk about consensus when everything is decided on one vote. How about send notification emails and if one didn't participate any vote more than 3 years, then revoke karma. If 3 years are too short, make it 4 or 5 years. Obsolete accounts can be cleaned with this method. Just an idea. Regards, -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohgaki@ohgaki.net --- ## #62558 — Hannes Magnusson — 2012-08-27T09:46:52+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62558 · In reply to: #62521 > > > […] > > There is a special group ("voting" IIRC) for wiki accounts with voting > rights. "Ordinary" (non-php.net) wiki account holders cannot vote. > Someone with DB access would need to check, but I believe there are > (were) only a couple of people in this special voting group. > There are 1651 persons with php.net VCS account. There is however no way to tell how active they are. There are 2 people with specific voting karma, I think Pierre demanded they got karma. Noone else can vote. That should be obvious by looking up the names of the voters on http://people.php.net. And why is this discussion buried in a foreach() voting announcement thread? -Hannes --- ## #62565 — Laruence — 2012-08-27T14:37:42+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62565 · In reply to: #62510 Hi: sorry to replying top. this is really a minor features, so few people are interesting in this. thus fewer people will vote for it. if people interesting in the RFC, he will vote. so I think it's okey.. thanks > Hi! > > > […] > > And here's again the problem with this voting setup. With all these long > discussions about people not getting votes we have 15 people that > bothered to vote at all, and essentially the vote is decided by one or > two single votes, and the vote doesn't even have to be from a PHP > contributor - but the vote of anybody who can register on PHP wiki is > enough to decide questions on the core of the language. And I'm not > talking about "the voice of the masses" there but by a single vote of > anybody who bothers to vote, which 99% of people just do not. > > I do not this it is a healthy state of things. Sorry to raise the topic > that was discussed 1000 times before, but the situation does not seem to > improve. > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect > SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ > (408)454-6900 ext. 227 -- Laruence Xinchen Hui http://www.laruence.com/ --- ## #62569 — Pierre Joye — 2012-08-27T23:06:20+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62569 · In reply to: #62510 > > Hi! > > > […] > > And here's again the problem with this voting setup. With all these long > discussions about people not getting votes we have 15 people that > bothered to vote at all, and essentially the vote is decided by one or > two single votes, and the vote doesn't even have to be from a PHP > contributor - but the vote of anybody who can register on PHP wiki is > enough to decide questions No. One has to get the vote/rfc karma. If that has changed, we have you restore this restriction. > anybody who bothers to vote, which 99% of people just do not. If one does not participate, his fault. Btw, we also have the 2/3 rule for language change as well. Cheers, Pierre --- ## #62570 — johannes@schlueters.de — 2012-08-28T00:21:01+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62570 · In reply to: #62517 > > > > […] > Though it make sense - it's a problem, because it'll delay and reject some > useful features because of requirements issue. If it is useful it should have enough supporters, else it most likely isn't useful. While there should be an option to actively abstain from voting. johannes --- ## #62571 — Pierre Joye — 2012-08-28T08:18:09+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62571 · In reply to: #62570 hi, On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Johannes Schlüter wrote: > > > […] > > If it is useful it should have enough supporters, else it most likely > isn't useful. While there should be an option to actively abstain from > voting. I am not sure the usefulness of this option, but it is possible to add a blank field ot any vote. If the idea is to say 'I do not care enough to vote yes or no' then simply vote no as one obviously either did not the RFC or do not want it. But this is off topic again in this thread, what's about creating a separate one if you feel like we need to refine this process? Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org --- ## #62576 — Will Fitch — 2012-08-28T17:07:48+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62576 · In reply to: #62571 I just noticed the RFC is listed in the Accepted category. Did something change with the 2/3rds voting requirement? Right now, it stands at 64% Yes. > hi, > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Johannes Schlüter > wrote: > > […] > before > > […] > some > > […] > > I am not sure the usefulness of this option, but it is possible to add > a blank field ot any vote. > > If the idea is to say 'I do not care enough to vote yes or no' then > simply vote no as one obviously either did not the RFC or do not want > it. > > But this is off topic again in this thread, what's about creating a > separate one if you feel like we need to refine this process? > > Cheers, > -- > Pierre > > @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org --- ## #62577 — Andrew Faulds — 2012-08-28T17:09:06+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62577 · In reply to: #62576 > I just noticed the RFC is listed in the Accepted category. Did something > change with the 2/3rds voting requirement? Right now, it stands at 64% Yes. I think some naughty folks might have snuck votes in after voting was over. It was certainly >64% when accepted. -- Andrew Faulds http://ajf.me/ --- ## #62578 — Andrew Faulds — 2012-08-28T17:11:11+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/62232#62578 · In reply to: #62576 > I just noticed the RFC is listed in the Accepted category. Did something > change with the 2/3rds voting requirement? Right now, it stands at 64% Yes. Sorry, disregard that previous email. I didn't look at the vote before sending it. If you look at the vote at the moment, it's 11 to 4, or 11/15. That is above 2/3rds, which is 10/15. -- Andrew Faulds http://ajf.me/ --- Next page: https://externals.io/message/62232.md?page=2