Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal: Adding functions any(iterable $input,?callable $cb = null, int $use_flags=0) and all(...)

August 30, 2020 15:55 (Josh Bruce)

Re the name, I see that.

I think part of the approachability of PHP is in the language being more common - though not being consistent in use of math, computer science, or common can be frustrating as all.

join() (math) -> alias of implode() (cheeky common??) -> could be array_as_string() (descriptive common) -> or concatenate_strings() (descriptive CS) -> or sum() (math)

I tend toward the descriptive common for self-documenting code purposes. I don’t need to know the implementation behind something like array_as_string() or concatenate_strings() - I do for join() (less) or implode() (more). sum(), for this example, would be very confusing.

Naming things is hard. lol


ps. I don’t know the origins for some of most of the functions in the standard library, but it is fascinating from a communication perspective.

> On Aug 30, 2020, at 10:40 AM, tyson andre <> wrote: > > Hi Josh Bruce, > >> The compelling feature here for me is the idea of an “array walker” that can be broken out of. >> >> all() could be and() at which point this should be equivalent. > > Yes, you can write `all($set, $predicate_fn)` as `!any($set, fn($x) => !$predicate_fn($x))` or some other common primitive such as and(), > but as an end user or a reviewer of code, I really don't want to do the latter, which is why I proposed adding both of these. (also see below snippet) > >> Would there also be an xor() or equivalent?? one() or something?? >> >> If (count(array_filter($collection, “is_int”)) === 1) > > I don't plan to expand the scope of the RFC more - there are various features such as none() or `exactly_n(int $n, $iterable, $callback)` I'm also not proposing. > RFC votes require a 2/3 majority and I'd think more would advocate doing one() in userland than any() > >> Here’s an implementation of each() I made that allows for breaking by the caller using a passed by ref third argument in the closure: - I’ve since deprecated that functionality and not sure if I’ll be bringing that functionality back because of frustrations and philosophical arguments with myself. :) > > Modifying a reference instead could be done to achieve the same result > as setting a reference boolean in the cases where you needed to know what element it was. > > ``` > if (any($values, function ($v) use (&$result) { > if ($v->satisfiesPredicate()) {$result = $v; return true;} return false; }) > ) { > process($result); > } > ``` > >> Part of me wishes the “all()” and “any()” names were more descriptive of what’s going on. >> >> When I call for “all” in a database or some ORM, I *get* all - I’m not verifying “all pass [a predicate]”. > > The naming is based on mathematical notation. > - any($list, $predicate) "Determines whether any element of the iterable satisfies the predicate." > - all($list, $predicate) "Determines whether all elements of the iterable satisfy the predicate." > > every() and some() are alternative names, > but all()/any() are my preference and appear more commonly used elsewhere. > > - > - > - > - > > Thanks, > - Tyson > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: >