Re: [DISCUSSION] Match expression

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 02:16, Ilija Tovilo <tovilo.ilija@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi internals > > I'd like to announce the match expression RFC that replaces the switch > expression RFC I announced a few weeks ago. > New: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/match_expression > Old: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/switch_expression > > Due to the feedback I decided to take the RFC in a slightly different > direction. The main objections were: > > 1. It didn't behave like the traditional switch so it shouldn't use > the switch keyword > 2. It didn't fix type coercion > 3. The RFC was poorly structured > > In hindsight I understand why I had a hard time writing the RFC. I > tried making a case against the switch statement while really not > addressing the switch statement at all. The new RFC proposes a match > expression that fixes all the objections raised against the switch > statement. Additionally, match arms can now contain statement lists > which allows you to use the match expression anywhere the switch > statement would have been used previously. > > While some people have suggested statement lists aren't necessary I > don't think it makes sense to raise objections against the switch > statement without offering an alternative. > > I also experimented with pattern matching but decided against it. The > exact reason is described in the RFC. > > I'm now confident this is the right approach. I hope you will be > happier with this proposal. > > Happy Easter! > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > Hello Ilija, I think this is a step in the right direction compared to your previous attempt. Your reasoning for not including pattern matching in this RFC also makes sense. Moreover, this could be added at a future time when it may make more sense. One small decision that I personally disagree with is the usage of => compared to using the colon as the switch statement does. As for me => means assigning a value to a key which isn't the case here IMHO. Also, combining this with less/greater or equal than binary operators makes for a rather confusing line in my eyes. E.g. Zend/tests/match/004.phpt in your PR, I don't really see the separation from where condition and where 'case' starts: Best regards George P. Banyard