> I think that would require an RFC. Alright, thanks.
> To clarify, you're proposing to replace this: >count((new ReflectionClass(Beep::class))->getAttributes(Ignore::class)) == true >with >(new ReflectionClass(Beep::class))->hasAttribute(Ignore::class) > Right? Correct. > That doesn't seem like a huge improvement. Probably not a huge one indeed, yet it makes the intent more clear for the use case at hand. Given such attributes are getting more and more common in userland, not only in frameworks, I tend to think it's worth considering. >Actually, > >if ((new ReflectionClass(Beep::class))->getAttributes(Ignore::class)) > >would work as well, so basically: > >$rc->hasAttribute(Ignore::class) === (bool) >$rc->getAttributes(Ignore::class); Yes, (ab)using `getAttributes()` for that purpose is certainly not a big deal, just like using `strpos()` for word detection was not. But `str_contains()` came up as it’s semantically better. Probably worth adding that such method looks consistent with other parts of the Reflection API like `hasProperty()`, `hasMethod()`, `hasConstant` or `implementsInterface()`. About other languages, Java has `isAnnotationPresent()` and C# has `Attribute.IsDefined()` - both serving the exact same purpose. -- Robin Chalas
