On Mon, Jun 7, 2021, at 4:00 PM, Eugene Leonovich wrote: > On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 9:03 PM Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> > wrote: > > > Hi folks. Me again. > > > > A year ago, I posted an RFC for a pipe operator, |>, aka function > > concatenation. At the time, the main thrust of the feedback was "cool, > > like, but we need partial function application first so that the syntax for > > callables isn't so crappy." > > > > The PFA RFC is winding down now and is looking quite good, so it's time to > > revisit pipes. > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pipe-operator-v2 > > > > Nothing radical has changed in the proposal since last year. I have > > updated it against the latest master. I also updated the RFC to use more > > examples that assume PFA, as the result is legit much nicer. i also tested > > it locally with a combined partials-and-pipes branch to make sure they play > > nicely together, and they do. (Yay!) Assuming PFA passes I will include > > those tests in the pipes branch before this one goes to a vote. > > > > > FTR, there are several typos in the "Hello World" examples (*strto*t*upper, > htmlent*i*ties*). Also, these examples will not work as written because > explode() expects two arguments and will fail if you pass only one: > https://3v4l.org/tLO0s. I wonder what the correct version of the pipe > example (the one that uses strings as callbacks) would look like, given > that you have to pass two arguments for explode()?
Hm. You're right. It used to, but it's been a very long time since explode() allowed an empty split, apparently. I updated the example to use str_split, which is what I'd intended to do in this case. Thanks. If you wanted to explode with a separator in a non-PFA pipes world, you'd need to wrap it in an arrow function. (Hence why a PFA-world pipe is all around better.) --Larry Garfield -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
