Hi
On 02.05.24 15:27, Larry Garfield wrote:
It's not just that it errors confusingly. It's that the design as is would be
incompatible with any C-based function. A function that works with anything
*except* the standard library seems... problematic.
It's possible that, since these new functions are C-based, we could do some
extra detection to see if the function is unary or not, and pass only the value
if it is. I don't know if that is possible to do performantly in C, but it's
definitely more of an option than if they were in user-space. (Again, I don't
know if this is the best solution, but it seems like a possible solution.)
I definitely get your point. However, there are not many standard
functions that can be used there. The only functions I can think of that
can be used there are `is_*` and maybe `strlen` (which has not a bool
return type).
I don't think that any internal functions are realistically passed
there, but rather user-defined ones. I would therefore not make the
function any more complicated than it already is. If the function works
differently with internal functions than with user functions, this can
also be very confusing for users.
Your suggestion in particular doesn't really solve the problem. This is
because the problem would still exist with the intval function, for
example. Two parameters are then also passed there, although the second
one makes little to no sense there. And to decide for each function
whether it makes sense or not …
The error message that too many parameters are passed is clear enough in
my opinion. This is something that developers have to learn once (like
many other things) and then the problem is solved. And even better, the
problem is detected beforehand by a static analysis tool.
Cheers
Josh
