I really prefer the Sara suggestion, instead of creating a new function to do the same thing. parse_str($str): array.
Atenciosamente, David Rodrigues Em qua., 23 de jun. de 2021 às 20:20, Sara Golemon <poll...@php.net> escreveu: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 5:02 PM Kamil Tekiela <tekiela...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I would like to propose a new simple RFC that aims to add a new function > > called parse_query_string as an alternative to parse_str. > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/parse_str_alternative > > > > The functionality stays the same, only the name and the way of returning > > the array changes. While it is a rather insignificant change, I believe > it > > is one step closer to making PHP cleaner. > > > > > There's a potential alternative option that doesn't require adding a new, > parallel function. We can use execute_data->return_value_used to figure > out if parse_str() was called with the result assigned to a local var. > This is overloady and probably a bad idea, but it's an option. > > if (ZEND_NUM_ARGS() == 2) { > // Put result into by-ref second arg > // parse_str($str, $refResult); > } else if (EX(return_value_used)) { > // Put result into return_value > // $result = parse_str($str); > } else { > // Put result into EG(local_symbol_table) > // parse_str($str); > php_error(E_DEPRECATED, ...); > } > > Realistically, your approach is probably better simply because it doesn't > depend on the assignment as a side-effect, and it'll be good to have a > migration route, especially one which gives us a function with, frankly, a > much better name. > > That said, and I'll sound like a broken record here, but this is another > case of being something that can be sorted in userspace trivially: > > function parse_query_string(string $str): array { > parse_str($str, $ret); > return $ret; > } > > Kinda +/- 0 on it at the moment. I'm less hostile to it than > str_contains()/str_left()/str_right()/etc... > > -Sara >
