Re: [RFC] [Discussion] array_first() and array_last()

On 4/8/25 8:46 PM, Claude Pache wrote: > Hi, > > I think that this argument is not convincing, and even counterproductive: > > * NULL is a rare legitimate value, so the potential for clashing is low > > First, it says that it is a “rare” legitimate value, which one can disagree with. (I do > disagree.) > I think it's a matter of phrasing, but I agree that it can be more nuanced. > Second, the way it is formulated, it implies that, when null is > used in array, there will be “clashing”, which is not necessarily the case. (I consider that > there is almost never a clash, because it is rarely useful to make the difference between an > explicit null and a missing value, and, when it is useful, you have > almost surely already checked for an empty array upfront.) > > I suggest to replace that argument with the two following ones, that doesn’t treat arrays > with NULL as second class citizens: > > * Semantically, NULL represents a missing value. Returning NULL from an empty array is not > semantically incorrect, but it means that the function doesn’t differentiate between a implicit > missing value (empty array) and an explicit missing value (array with NULL as its first/last > element). > > * In the relatively rare cases you do want to make the difference between an empty array and an > array that starts/ends with NULL, you can (and should) just check for empty array upfront. > That's indeed a bit better worded and more nuanced. I might adapt the RFC text a bit; although in the end it kinda means the same thing anyway. > ------- > > One more thing. On https://www.php.net/, I read: “Fast, > flexible and pragmatic, PHP powers everything from your blog to the most popular websites in the > world.” (emphasis added). If we were to design some new perfect language, we might consider making > array_first() (or equivalent) choke on empty arrays. But given the > current state of the affairs, the pragmatic thing to do is to pave the cowpath. I agree. I value consistency; we have too much inconsistency already in PHP anyway, let's not add more (unless we would have a very very good reason to do so; but that's not in this case IMO).