On 11/09/2013 13:16, jbo...@openmv.com wrote:
I'm still undecided about 'mixing' positional & named arguments: An
example use case for **kwargs here:
http://www.python-requests.org/en/latest/api/ If you declare:
request($method, $url, ...$args) Would $args collect 'method' and
'url' ? request(
On Mon Sep 9 03:18 PM, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> I created an RFC and preliminary implementation for named parameters:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/named_params
I really like the idea!
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 2:16 PM, jbo...@openmv.com wrote:
>
> My preference would be to only support named pa
On Mon Sep 9 03:18 PM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> > I created an RFC and preliminary implementation for named parameters:
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/named_params
> >
>
Awesome work!
>
> Let only special functions accept named params
> -
>
Proposal makes sense though there's still the
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> I think you are over-thinking this case actually. I would prefer to just
> keep it simple. If someone does a named parameter call to a method that
> doesn't have a parameter with a specified parameter it is an error,
> regardless of how th
On 09/10/2013 12:27 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Yes, throwing an error during the signature validation is the "right" thing
> to do from a theoretic point of view. The issue is just that it breaks old
> code which didn't make sure that parameter names between parent and child
> lined up. "Break" is
What about:
class Giant {
public function foo( $height, $width ) { ... }
}
class FallenOverGiant extends Giant {
public function foo( $width, $height ) { ... }
}
There's nothing to stop you doing that; I think it's actually done in some
of the codebases I work on.
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Daniel Macedo wrote:
> Nikita,
>
> I agree with your views, although, I think your last suggestion comes
> close to being close to some sort of weird method overloading (the way
> I understood it).
>
Uh, I think this is a misunderstanding caused by my bad phrasing
Nikita,
I agree with your views, although, I think your last suggestion comes
close to being close to some sort of weird method overloading (the way
I understood it).
I'd expect B::foo() to throw a warning/error and maybe stop there, and
you're considering reaching to the parent method to see if
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Pascal Chevrel wrote:
> Le 06/09/2013 18:39, Nikita Popov a écrit :
>
>> Hi internals!
>>
>> I created an RFC and preliminary implementation for named parameters:
>>
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/named_params
>>
>> The RFC and implementation are not yet complete.
