On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Basically: token_get_all() is rather slow. I think it says something that
> getting the tokens of a script is about as slow as lexing it, parsing it
> into an internal AST and constructing an object-based userland AST for it.
> If you use token
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Sara Golemon wrote:
>> Maybe TOKEN_ASSOC? Since it provides associative array elements (as
>> opposed to the current indexed array behavior)
>
> I like that one.
>
Have updated the RFC accordingly.
I've also ren
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Sara Golemon wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 6:16 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> > Would be nice if someone could come up with a more explicit name for the
> > flag. TOKEN_FULL is not obvious, at least to me. TOKEN_ALWAYS_ARRAY?
> >
> Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of the na
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 6:16 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Would be nice if someone could come up with a more explicit name for the
> flag. TOKEN_FULL is not obvious, at least to me. TOKEN_ALWAYS_ARRAY?
>
Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of the name either, but I couldn't come up
with anything better at the ti
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Sara Golemon wrote:
> I swear, 2016 isn't going to be "An RFC per day" year, but...
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/token-get-always-tokens
>
> This should be pretty non-controversial. I hope?
>
>
+1
Would be nice if someone could come up with a more explicit name
Total +1. I wanted to propose that, without the flag, but it got too
late for the PHP7 BC breaking season. Adding a flag seems to be a
better idea :P
2016-01-04 18:56 GMT-04:00 Sara Golemon :
> I swear, 2016 isn't going to be "An RFC per day" year, but...
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/token-get-alw
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> Do you mean have users of the API do that? Or have the implementation
>> of token_name() do that? Because the latter doesn't seem unreasonable
>> at all.
>
> I meant for token_name() to do that internally, so that the user can use
> jus
Hi!
>> We could, of course, do something like
>> $token[0]<=255?$token[0]:token_name($token[0]) - but that looks hacky.
>>
> Do you mean have users of the API do that? Or have the implementation
> of token_name() do that? Because the latter doesn't seem unreasonable
> at all.
I meant for token_n
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> I think it's a great idea, token_get_all() is annoying
> to deal with. We'd have to fix token_name though so that this would
> still work:
>
Ah, excellent point!
> We could, of course, do something like
> $token[0]<=255?$token[0]:token_n
Hi!
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/token-get-always-tokens
>
> This should be pretty non-controversial. I hope?
No way!
Just kidding :) I think it's a great idea, token_get_all() is annoying
to deal with. We'd have to fix token_name though so that this would
still work:
foreach ($tokens as $token)
10 matches
Mail list logo