On 5/27/12 10:27 AM, Mathias Grimm wrote:
> in response to https://wiki.php.net/rfc/skipparams I want to suggest
> something as depicted below:
>
> function very_long_params(name:$n, age:$a, other:$o)
The goal of this proposal is not to introduce named parameters. If we
ever do introduce named pa
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 6:14 PM, William Betts wrote:
> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Mathias Grimm >wrote:
>
> > Named parameter in the same way that goto does, with labels. A labeled
> > parameter...
> > But there always some drawbacks... such as mix named and conventional
> > parameters. I
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Mathias Grimm wrote:
> Named parameter in the same way that goto does, with labels. A labeled
> parameter...
> But there always some drawbacks... such as mix named and conventional
> parameters. I think that you just chose one way and use, not allowing mix
> these
Named parameter in the same way that goto does, with labels. A labeled
parameter...
But there always some drawbacks... such as mix named and conventional
parameters. I think that you just chose one way and use, not allowing mix
these two ways.
I also think that should exists a strict way to wri
NOTE: Although related/solving some of the same problems; skipping optional
parameters (several commas or using 'default' keyword) is different from
using named parameters.
And both have different supporters/haters over each change.
I wouldn't like to restart the whole debate over the KISS, "Not t
in response to https://wiki.php.net/rfc/skipparams I want to suggest
something as depicted below:
function very_long_params(name:$n, age:$a, other:$o)
{
}
or
function very_long_params(:name = null, :age, :other)
{
$name = trim($name);
...
}
$result = very_long_params(age:20, other:'foo',
