On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 2:36 PM Mike Schinkel <m...@newclarity.net> wrote:
> On May 26, 2021, at 2:34 PM, Sara Golemon <poll...@php.net> wrote: > > > What I don't like about the specific proposal is that it's just a little > too magic in its function selection and argument mapping. There's also the > fact that it doesn't leave room to improve specifics about the > implementations of the methods. I'd much rather seen an `Array` class > defined with specific methods declared on it. > > > Wouldn't an `Array` class necessarily result in array-incompatible > pass-by-reference semantics, which is one of the same issues with userland > using ArrayObject as an array replacement? > > It would if the Array objects got returned. I'm instead picturing an instance that magically comes into being solely for the duration of the method call. Once the method returns, the object vanishes. -Sara
