On 18/11/2014 23:11, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
"Been in PHP for a very long time" != "how it was intended to work". Can
>you explain why this would be the intention of anyone designing the
>language?
Of course, been for a long time is not the same as intended. But if you
look at how ZEND_NEW is done, it's clear it's intended. And the reason
is simple - if there's no function, it's not really possible to initiate
a function call and handle it properly, since the engine expects certain
data there and there's nothing to provide that data. So, ZEND_NEW having
no function just skips the whole function call thing altogether.
This is where I struggle: to me, the "++$b" in "foo(++$b)" or "new
Foo(++$b)" isn't part of the function call; it's a statement that has to
be evaluated *before* the function call can happen.
If a fatal error is being raised, it makes (some) sense to skip that
evaluation, but if execution is continuing, it seems perfectly natural
for that expression to be evaluated even if its result is discarded.
If you think the decision was wrong and it can be done better
- cool, let's see the patch.
I'm happy to accept that this is a low-priority, hard-to-fix, bug. I
just don't see that it can be justified as a feature.
--
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
