Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Add clamp function

On Thursday 28 August 2025 13:28:43 (+02:00), Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Hi > > >> There's precedent in ext/random with the Randomizer::getFloat() method that takes > >> a Random\IntervalBoundary enum to decide on the the interpretation of the boundary values. > >> Translated to clamp() this could mean: > >> > If it weren't living in the Random extension, that very Enum could have been > >> > used. > > Indeed. Back when introducing the enum, we actually had a discussion about naming and > “placement”. In the end, we opted to make it ext/random-specific as a more conservative choice. > I think back then it was the first native enum. > > See https://externals.io/message/118810#118910 and > https://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/11?m=55444127#55444127. > > If a new general-purpose IntervalBoundary enum is introduced, I'm happy to widen the type > in ext/random from \Random\IntervalBoundary to > \IntervalBoundary|\Random\IntervalBoundary (and deprecate the latter > in one of the following versions). > > Best regards > Tim Düsterhus > Not sure if I'm too much off track here: As we can't alias classes in userland that are internal classes, internally PHP could do the oppsite and given clamp could borrow it out to/from \Random\IntervalBoundary given we have enough discipline. That also could buy some time on the widening idea and preserve a bit of the conservative approach to further on defer the details until necessary. Widening is certainly correct in its own right, but why not keep the door open this way so one day we can applaud the first internal enum for its foresight? -- hakre