Hi Ilija,
> This is because we don't generate a jumptable when there are less than
> 5 integer conditions. Because of this inconsistency I'm not sure if we
> should just remove the warning. As you mentioned, it could be
> intentional in some cases. Tyson also mentioned that some constants
> are pl
Hi Dan
> I don't think PHP can guarantee to detect duplicate conditions
This warning is only shown if duplication is guaranteed, namely when a
jumptable is generated. Which also makes the check fairly cheap.
> Would the duplicate condition* below be detected?
No, as jumptables are only generate
On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 19:20, Ilija Tovilo wrote:
> Just a heads up, I'd like to start the voting on the match expression
> RFC in a couple of days.
> The jury is still out on:
>
> <*multiple issues>
>
> If you have anything new to add to the discussion, this is your chance!
>
On Mon, 20 Apr 202
Hi Andrea
> Well, I don't think we have any other expressions that are also
> statements with very slightly different syntax
The syntax isn't actually different. We don't have different grammar
for the match statement and expression. There's only one. Think of it
more like a type check. In other
Hi Ilija,
Ilija Tovilo wrote:
I share others' concern that it is inconsistent with PHP's
existing statements
Can you elaborate on what exactly the concerns are?
Well, I don't think we have any other expressions that are also
statements with very slightly different syntax, and in this RFC yo
Hi Andrea
I realize there's a lot of noise in the mailing list right now, I'll
keep this my only e-mail for today.
> I share others' concern that it is inconsistent with PHP's
> existing statements
Can you elaborate on what exactly the concerns are? Note that even if
we added block expressions t
