Re: Re: Str enhancement, final run

Hi there, excuse my ignorance, but could someone provide me w/ some hints as to the origin of this thread? I must've missed it (just returned from vacation). Since I haven't seen prior messages in this/related thread(s), I might be off base here. Sorry if this is the case. Now, some time ago (>1.5y) when I began exploring PHP and stumbled upon something unintuitive (had to do w/ strings being similar to arrays but not completely equivalent...) Andi told me strings would be eventually made more different from arrays. Now, I might be the only one, but I actually like the idea of equivalence of strings and arrays. For example, I'd like to be able to foreach() a string just like it was an array (last time I checked the behavior was st. like 'string' being used as if it was array('string') - I'd prefer array('s','t','r', 'i','n','g'). As for the Andre's suggestions, I like Python's ranges in both lists and strings (they use colon instead of two dots). I some details of it unintuitive, but don't remember what it was exactly as it's been some time since I touched Python though. I can look it up if anyone's interested. Oh, where can I subscribe to engine2@lists.zend.com? Seems like that's where the fun is. :) At 18:38 7/10/2001, Andi Gutmans wrote the following: -------------------------------------------------------------- >At 06:00 PM 7/10/2001 +0200, André Langhorst wrote: >>As it were Andi's last words, is it the finial decison now just to implement $foo{x} to >>retrieve a single char? >>I'm asking this again, because it will be irreversible because it is not compatible >>with substr($foo,x) == $foo{x}!!! >>And as I still do not agree that substr($foo,4,6) should be better than >>$foo{4,6} I now have another (taken and modified from Zeev or Andi) offer, which *is >>intuitive*: >> >>What about the range proposals? $foo{4..6} where $foo{6..} would mean to the end, no >>negative numbers, nothing else but at least that would simplify string processing a bit (although I >>am still in favor for the substr() solution). >> >>I think even Zeev would agree that this is intuitive ;) >>So far we have: >> >>$foo{x} get char at pos x >>$foo{x..} get chars from pos x to the end >>$foo{x..y} get chars from pos x to y > >This option looks nice but I don't like the extensions mentioned below. I still think that >people who need more complicated stuff can use substr(). But I know many don't agree with me so >I prefer to wait a while with the discussion until we start advancing a bit in the Engine 2 >implementation and then we will also have more of a technical basis to judge not only what is nice >but also what is technically feasible. >The only thing I think is pretty sure is that $foo{x} will work :) > >Andi > > >>Now what if we do not know the position of the last character? >> >>$foo{x..-5} get chars from pos x to the minus 5 >>I tried to interprete this differently but I failed, isn't this called intuitive? >> >>As an alternative we even modify it to >>$foo{x..|} and $foo{x..|-4} >>if anyone feels better with it... >> >>Comments welcome, >>andré >> >>ps. I do not remember the engine2 email address, if anyone could forward it... > > >-- >PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-dev-unsubscribe@lists.php.net >For additional commands, e-mail: php-dev-help@lists.php.net >To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin@lists.php.net ------end of quote------ cynic@mail.cz ------------- And the eyes of them both were opened and they saw that their files were world readable and writable, so they chmoded 600 their files. - Book of Installation chapt 3 sec 7