Re: RFC proposal for adding SORT_STRICT flag to array_unique()

Rob has convinced me SORT_STRICT is semantically incorrect. I agree SORT_BINARY has merit, though I'm having difficulty with the implementation.. I think I got too focused on _convention_ wanting to align naming convention with the existing SORT_* flags. But a perfectly acceptable alternative exists, ARRAY_UNIQUE_STRICT. I'm aware of the previous effort (https://externals.io/message/118952) made regarding the flag ARRAY_UNIQUE_IDENTICAL. While this is technically correct and follows existing convention (e.g. ARRAY_FILTER_USE_*), I personally feel it's a bit awkward. ARRAY_UNIQUE_STRICT is, I think, a bit more intuitive. Especially today, as declare(strict_types=1) has become more common and even encouraged, particularly for those who love PHPStan level max haha. Pull it, test it, break it. Let's do this! https://github.com/php/php-src/compare/master...jmarble:php-src:feature/array-unique-sort-strict On Sat, Oct 25, 2025 at 7:41 AM Morgan <Weedpacket@varteg.nz> wrote: > On 2025-10-26 00:16, Rob Landers wrote: > > > > > Object identity and value are different things... > > https://3v4l.org/uZTsN > > <https://3v4l.org/uZTsN> > > > > > $white == new Color("white") > > That's comparing the values of the objects' properties (which may or may > not be relevant to its "effective value" - the comparison applies to > private properties as well) and considering the aggregate to be the > "value of the object". > > Regardless, the comparison is certainly not useful to me (where > recursively grovelling around in the objects' properties would be > prohibitively expensive if not fatal), and doesn't make array_unique() > any more helpful in deduplicating. >