Re: RFC [Discussion]: array_find

Hi On 01.05.24 12:26, Larry Garfield wrote:

This looks good to me, with one remaining exception, which isn't specific to this function but should still be discussed: Always passing the value and key to the callback is unsafe, for two reasons. 1. If the callback is an internal function rather than a user-land one, and it has only one argument, it will error confusingly. That makes the current implementation incompatible with unary built-in functions. See, for instance, https://www.php.net/is_string (and friends)

I think, that this problem can easily be detected with static analysers. Currently neither PHPStan [1] nor psalm [2] does detect this issue, but as the tools already validate the signature (e.g. str_contains is rejected) this can probably be integrated and might even be considered a bug. The proper fix from PHP's side would be something like the proposal in https://externals.io/message/122928 (RFC idea: using the void type to control maximum arity of user-defined functions).

2. If the callback takes two arguments but the second is optional, it's highly unlikely that the key is the value expected as the second argument. This could lead to confusingly hilarious errors. See, for instance, https://www.php.net/intval. These won't come up in the typical case of passing an inline closure (either short or long form), but are still hidden landmines for anyone using functions not tailor made for these functions.

I see the problem, but don't think, that this is a problem, that we can solve. As a note: Such problems exists in JavaScript, too [3] and is handled in the same way.

I'm not sure of a good solution here, honestly, so I don't know what to recommend. In Crell/fp, I ended up just making two different versions of the function that pass one or two arguments. I don't think that's a good answer for this RFC, but I'm not sure what is. At the very least, it should be mentioned as a known-limitation that gets documented., unless we can come up with something better.

I have added this problem in the section "Open Issues" in the RFC to document this behavior. [1] https://phpstan.org/r/bd0866cd-6a76-4c18-8eb3-0f3848de7f4a [2] https://psalm.dev/r/1baa3f8e0d [3] https://wirfs-brock.com/allen/posts/166