On Thu, Jan 21, 2021, at 4:37 PM, Sara Golemon wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 3:29 PM Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm unclear why you'd allow null at all then.
> > If you want $bar to be optional, and to be an empty array if not
> specified, then just do:
> >
> > function foo(array $bar = []) { ... }
> >
> > At that point, the only thing adding ?array does is allow you to
> explicitly pass null,
> > presumably because it has some meaning to your function.
> > If you don't want that, don't allow it.
> >
>
> Smells a little like it's verging on the `default` proposal that was
> brought up awhile ago...
>
> function foo(int $a, array $b = [], string $c = '') { ... }
> foo(123, default, "bar");
>
> In this case, foo() never wants `null` as a valid value, but neither does
> the caller actually want anything different from the default.
>
> Allowing a null-coalescish sort of initializer is another potential way to
> solve this problem, and I'm not here to say I endorse any of them, but
> maybe that's the intent.
>
> -Sara
I'd argue that named arguments have rendered the main argument for `default`
null and void.
(How many puns can he squeeze into one sentence, Bob?)
--Larry Garfield
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
