On 5 November 2014 11:43, Chris Wright <c...@daverandom.com> wrote: > On 5 November 2014 11:22, Leigh <lei...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 4 November 2014 18:14, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > If anything, I think I would expect the keys of splatted arrays to be >> discarded, since it seems most natural to use this in a list context, but I >> can imagine always having to check in the manual. >> >> I agree on this point. Duplicate keys should not overwrite each other. >> >> [...$foo, ...$bar] should literally unpack the values as if they were >> comma delimited and discard all key information. >> >> > Here's how I picture this, which is the rationale for my view on how it > should behave: > > $foo = ['a' => 1, 'b' => 2, 'c' => 3]; > $bar = ['c' => 4, 'd' => 5, 'e' => 6, ...$foo]; > // is identical to writing > $bar = ['a' => 1, 'b' => 2, 'c' => 3, 'c' => 4, 'd' => 5, 'e' => 6]; > > http://3v4l.org/inqtg#v540 > > In other words, in that scenario it's basically syntactic sugar to avoid > having to write out the "body" of the array twice, and would behave > identically as if you had done this. > > Of course, if the majority opinion that this is not the correct approach, > I'm happy to admit I'm wrong :-) >
Having performed an extremely unscientific (but I think reasonably fair and unbiased) straw-poll of a few people today, I can tell you that the general expectation of everyone I have spoken to about it is that it would work the same as outlined above.
