RE: [PHP] Mixed return type - boolean and array/resource/closure or object
| From: | Robert Stoll | Date: | Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:21:43 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PHP] Mixed return type - boolean and array/resource/closure or object | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-323045@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christoph Becker [mailto:cmbecker69@gmx.de]
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:31 PM
> To: Robert Stoll; 'Sebastian Krebs'
> Cc: 'PHP General List'
> Subject: Re: [PHP] Mixed return type - boolean and array/resource/closure or object
>
> Robert Stoll wrote:
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Christoph Becker [mailto:cmbecker69@gmx.de]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 5:37 PM
> >> To: Robert Stoll; 'Sebastian Krebs'
> >> Cc: 'PHP General List'
> >> Subject: Re: [PHP] Mixed return type - boolean and array/resource/closure or object
> >>
> >> Robert Stoll wrote:
> >>
> >>> Nevertheless, the signature in the documentation implies that
> >>> date_create() returns always DateTime. I already submitted a patch to
> >>> change it to mixed :)
> >>
> >> IMHO, the signature is fine, as false is returned only in *exceptional*
> >> cases. To be strict, changing the return type to mixed had to be done
> >> for (nearly) *all* functions, because several may return false in error
> >> cases, and many will return null when wrong arguments are passed.
> >
> > I see your point. But IMO it is confusing that something else is returned than mentioned
> > in the signature. I always
take
> > strpos as a reference (it has mixed as return type). Yet, mixed is not really precise and
> > I think it would be better
to
> > have something like "int|false" or a shorter form, maybe "int!" to
> > indicate that either int or false is returned.
> >
> > Changing strpos to int would be wrong IMO. I want to see at one glance from the signature
> > of the function what it
> > returns. As I said mixed is not ideal either since I have to scroll down to 'Return
> > Values' but better than
confusing
> > me.
> >
> > About null, I see null as part of an object type. I know that many people would not agree
> > on this one but for me it
> > makes sense.
>
> I was referring to the following note regarding built-in functions[1]:
>
> | If the parameters given to a function are not what it expects, such
> | as passing an array where a string is expected, the return value of
> | the function is undefined. In this case it will likely return NULL
> | but this is just a convention, and cannot be relied upon.
>
> [1] <http://www.php.net/manual/en/functions.internal.php>
>
> --
> Christoph M. Becker
Cheers, I wasn't aware of this fact.