Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Stas, > > This is a great illustration of different visions we have here. On one > > hand, we have practical, immediate feature that covers a clear use case > > and does not add any constructs or complexity to the core language and > > ser

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

Stas, This is a great illustration of different visions we have here. On one > hand, we have practical, immediate feature that covers a clear use case > and does not add any constructs or complexity to the core language and > services immediate need, covering several lines of frequently > encounte

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

Hi! > Voting no, because - even though I like this feature in principle - I think > it's much better solved by introducing list comprehensions (which cover > this and many more cases in a consistent and elegant syntax), which is > something I have planned for 5.6. This is a great illustration of

Re: [PHP-DEV] A remark about PHP's Vision and new things.

That is seriously funny On Jan 11, 2013, at 11:35 PM, Levi Morrison wrote: >> Can we re-write PHP with PHP? ;) > > Anthony and Nikita are already on it: https://github.com/ircmaxell/PHPPHP > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.ph

Re: [PHP-DEV] A remark about PHP's Vision and new things.

> Can we re-write PHP with PHP? ;) Anthony and Nikita are already on it: https://github.com/ircmaxell/PHPPHP -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > Voting no, because - even though I like this feature in principle - I think > it's much better solved by introducing list comprehensions (which cover > this and many more cases in a consistent and elegant syntax), which is > something I have

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 1:36 AM, Matt Pelmear wrote: > That said, I hate function aliases. Can't we have one or the other here, > not both? (array_column() vs array_pluck()) > Agree fully on this part. If this is going to make it, then please, *please* without aliases. array_column() is my prefe

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

On 01/11/2013 04:17 PM, Ben Ramsey wrote: I've opened voting for the array_column() function RFC. You can vote at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_column#voting Regards, Ben +1 I can't vote, but I support this RFC. This is much, much simpler to use and easier to implement than most other th

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Ben Ramsey wrote: > I've opened voting for the array_column() function RFC. > > You can vote at > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**array_column#voting > > Regards, > Ben > Voting no, because - even though I like this featu

[PHP-DEV] [VOTE] array_column() function

I've opened voting for the array_column() function RFC. You can vote at https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_column#voting Regards, Ben -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP-DEV] A remark about PHP's Vision and new things.

On 1/11/2013 1:17 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: Hi! A function that is related to a zend_function struct could be placed anywhere, in any file and can be named in any way. Finding it is like looking for a needle in a haystack, then you add macros. You can do macros in C++ too, and you can have de

Re: [PHP-DEV] A remark about PHP's Vision and new things.

I would definitely vote "No" on object oriented. I'd vote for C++ but SOLELY because templates. I'd stay away from classes as they generally hurt performance. Sorry for the off-topic comment :) On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > Oooh, a rewrite? Can we write it in an object

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision

Hi! > You make a very sane argument and I agree on the selective process, > however, every time I read internals it seems that the general attitude is: > > "please don't add more to it" This is obviously not true as each new release adds many things and you can see results of the votes and read

Re: [PHP-DEV] A remark about PHP's Vision and new things.

Hi! > A function that is related to a zend_function struct could be placed > anywhere, in any file and can be named in any way. Finding it is like > looking for a needle in a haystack, then you add macros. You can do macros in C++ too, and you can have detached functions too. And it is perfectly

Re: [PHP-DEV] A remark about PHP's Vision and new things.

Hi! > To make sure we are not providing a somewhat cumbersome > implementation, let’s start tackling named parameters first. It’s > another long standing feature. We will most likely need named > parameters for convenient annotations anyway. We have an (really old) > RFC for that: https://wiki.php

Re: [PHP-DEV] A remark about PHP's Vision and new things.

2013/1/11 Clint Priest > > Even so, C++ is not the only object oriented language out there. > > -Clint I could not resist the urge to suggest D as an option :) Sorry for this troll attempt. Well, there is Quercus out there in the wild, they did it. Sure a total rewrite will give opportun

Re: [PHP-DEV] A remark about PHP's Vision and new things.

It's a pretty decent read, but the major point that his article about the virtues of C misses a huge mark. Software written in C, when they become of sufficient size become completely impossible to keep track of. A function that is related to a zend_function struct could be placed anywhere, i

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP is not ...

I can't disagree with some of your sentiments, that new things are being developed while there are some "old things" that are incomplete or in dis-repair. Unfortunately, PHP being developed as it is, there are only so many people able to work on the core. My own story with php-core was like

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision

On 11/01/2013 09:14, dukeofgaming wrote: Finally, I remember the lack of support for development has been a problem... so why not call out for support to the community?, from GSoC to PHP gurus litterate on Comp Sci and software engineering and architecture? I think this has been done before a

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP is not ...

Hi Arvids, This is exactly what I've stated yesterday here, you can read it at http://news.php.net/php.internals/64820 but I've yet to receive an answer for it. The problem is that someone will actually need to implement the whole thing again, in C, again, and it's going to be painful (again).

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP is not ...

I have to agree with Lester. It seems that there is a conspiracy to push annotations into PHP :D No, really, it's like goons decided that PHP needs annotations no matter what and just flooded the mailing list. I think: "The line must be drawn here, this far, no further!" © Star Trek Before adding

Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP is not ...

On 1/11/2013 2:44 AM, Lester Caine wrote: Some of you will have heard this before, but please bare with me ... The folks on this list don't need to see you naked. -- Thomas Hruska CubicleSoft President I've got great, time saving software that you might find useful. http://cubiclesoft.com/

[PHP-DEV] PHP is not ...

Some of you will have heard this before, but please bare with me ... A number of years ago I needed a new infrastructure to produce 'web based' versions of the windows client code I've been writing since window 3.1 days. I'd been using C++ for many years and still have to support that code. C#

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision

2013/1/11 dukeofgaming > I have a question, maybe it is dumb: why not those opposed to using > annotations just... refrain from using them? > As I said in a previous message: « (...) providing annotations as it is proposed will make them a core feature of the language. It will be perceived like

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Ralf Lang wrote: > Am 11.01.2013 05:55, schrieb dukeofgaming: > > I have a question, maybe it is dumb: why not those opposed to using > > annotations just... refrain from using them? > > > > Although I am not the least against annotations, there are valid and > go

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - We Need A Vision

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:00 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: > Hi! > > > I have a question, maybe it is dumb: why not those opposed to using > > annotations just... refrain from using them? > > We've been there before. You seem to be thinking as a person who only > writes software for himself and has to