Re: Re: Named Parameters

On 13.04.2010, at 23:39, GM wrote: > Personally, I would strongly prefer the caller syntax my_func('a', 'b', > 'c' => 'd', $e => $f) just to because > > 1) it's consistent with array declaration syntax > 2) it allows arbitrary names for parameters, which will become the array keys ... and can > include funny characters > 3) naked identifiers in PHP are used only for functions, classes and constants, so c => > 'd' looks like a constant > 4) it allows the flexibility of dynamically specifying parameter names, although this will > probably be rarely needed > > My second favorite is my_func('a', 'b', c => 'd') ... which I > consider worse but at least not as bad as my_func('a', 'b', c: 'd') > ... which seems to come out of left field as it's not consistent with the rest of PHP syntax. > Unless, of course, c: 'd' is going to be a shorthand for 'c' => 'd' > ... which makes me ask ... if you guys are ever going to make a short array declaration syntax, will > it look something like this: {'a'=>'b', 'c'=>'d'} > or will it look like {a: 'b', c: 'd'} ? Just stumbled over a post about SQL 2011 which also seems to get support for named parameters for functions [1]: "Named arguments in function calls. PostgreSQL 9.0 supports that, but using the syntax foo(3 AS a) instead of what ended up in the standard, foo(a => 3)." regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith mls@pooteeweet.org [1] http://petereisentraut.blogspot.com/2010/04/news-from-sql-standard.html