Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Add bcdivmod to BCMath

Hi Larry, > I agree an associative array is the second-worst option. An inout by-ref argument is the > absolute worst. > > Normally my default position is that when in doubt, make it a structured object with properly > defined properties, and screw whatever micro-performance hit it is, you won't notice. 99% of > the time I believe that is the correct approach. > > I can see the argument that this is the other 1%, since it's just two values, which will > basically always be wanted separately but both wanted (meaning divmod(...)->divsor is kinda > pointless), and their order should be fairly self-evident. > > However, in that case I would urge that both the RFC and the resulting documentation *always* > use examples that return into a [$foo, $bar] destructured list. > Don't even suggest that people should use 0 and 1 indexes. It's a tuple for > deconstruction, that's it, if you're using it some other way you're probably wrong. > Politely ignore that it's even possible, lest we lead people down the dark path. > > (Which means removing the current index-using example and just keeping the pizza example.) > > --Larry Garfield Thanks, agree. I rewrote the non-pizza example. Regards, Saki