Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] array_part()
| From: | Gustavo Lopes | Date: | Mon, 21 May 2012 21:14:05 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] array_part() | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-60639@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
First, I'd like to announce the native implementation is available on github:
https://github.com/cataphract/php-src/compare/array_part
Please review this feature BEFORE voting starts. Unless something comes up that has to be dealt with until then, I want to start voting on Monday, 28th May.
Now my answer to Richard:
On Mon, 21 May 2012 21:30:24 +0200, Richard Lynch <ceo@l-i-e.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 14, 2012 9:03 am, Gustavo Lopes wrote:Such a behavior would be possible and would not be difficult to implement. However, it raises questions that are not easy to answer like: - should it keep the first or the last keys? Or perhaps it could instead collect all the elements under a new array. - should the behavior for numeric keys differ from that of string keys (perhaps in a array_merge way?) Since the path to add this behavior in the future is straightforward (add another optional argument, like in array_slice), not including it causes little damage in terms of future growth. On the other hand, my hope is that limiting the current design decisions to a easy subset may allow this to be merged rapidly. -- Gustavo Lopes* array_slice() can preserve keys, array_part() cannot because when collapsing levels this would mean the possibility of overwriting elements.A predictable LIFO or FIFO for any collapsed keys would be reasonable, and probably not much more work to implement. By LIFO I mean that the last value to be put under a key would "win" I think that would be the most natural.