Re: RFC: Server-Side Request and Response Objects (v2)

Hi Côme, > On Feb 18, 2020, at 03:24, Côme Chilliet <come.chilliet@fusiondirectory.org> wrote: > > Le jeudi 13 février 2020, 09:16:49 CET Paul M. Jones a écrit : > >> Yeah, naming is one of the hard problems. I considered $query as an alternative property >> name for $get, but in the end, the $_GET => $get symmetry was too >> great to ignore. If others here feel that $query is a better name for >> $_GET than $get, I will submit to consensus on that point. > > query is definitely better than get. Excellent. > Regarding post, I’m fine with body, parsedBody and input. > > I get the idea of input to mimic php://input, but if I understand things correctly, php://input > is raw body, while $request->post is parsed body, so naming them alike might actually cause > confusion? Might, might not. I don't think there is any "good" name here, only names that are less-bad than others. > I still do not understand this. > echo adds content to the response, it does not replace it. > So the equivalent function should be $response->addContent. > > I would expect $response->setContent to replace the content. Ah, I see what you are getting at now ... > Can you explicit behavior for this: > > $response->setContent("a\n"); > $response->setContent("b\n"); > $responseSender->send($response); > > Compared to > > echo "a\n"; > echo "b\n"; ... the output would be "b\n". As you say, setContent() replaces whatever content is already in the ServerResponse. While the comparison for a single echo is accurate, the comparison for multiple echoes would be: $content = "a\n"; $content .= "b\n"; $response->setContent($content); $responseSender->send($content); Does that help to clarify? -- Paul M. Jones pmjones@pmjones.io http://paul-m-jones.com Modernizing Legacy Applications in PHP https://leanpub.com/mlaphp Solving the N+1 Problem in PHP https://leanpub.com/sn1php