Re: Re: Allowing is_* functions to accept multiple parameters

On 19 September 2013 03:20, William Bartlett <william.a.bartlett@gmail.com> wrote: > I would argue that LTR support is also inconsistent / not desired. > > If I wrote: > > $i = 0; > is_three($i = $i + 1, $i = $i + 1, $i = $i + 1); > > I would certainly expect is_three to return false, but I would also expect > $i to contain three. php doesn't normally evaluate arguments lazily, it > would be weird for that behavior to suddenly crop up. users who want lazy > evaluation can write it the traditional way (with &&). I think there has been some misunderstanding of my intention here (maybe I communicated it badly) - Originally I was pretty confused when reading Bobs response as it was way beyond the scope of what I was proposing. When I say parameters evaluated LTR / boolean short-curcuit evaluation I mean it like this: $i = 1; $f = 1.1; is_int($i, $f, $i, $i) => is_int(1) && is_int(1.1) && is_int(1) && is_int(1) is_int($i++, $f++, $i++, $i++) => is_int(1) && is_int(1.1) && is_int(2) && is_int(3) $i == 4; $f == 2.1; Internally, processing will stop at the is_int(1.1) and not bother continuing to check the types of further arguments. I did not mean: is_int($i++, $f++, $i++, $i++) => is_int($i++) && is_int($f++) && is_int($i++) && is_int($i++) As Bob said, this would take some pretty nuts opcode processing, and is completely not worth the effort involved. I may have emphasised a parallel with isset() a bit too much, however isset() cannot take expressions as input. I was never intending to try and evaluate parameters as they were passed and jump over subsequent evaluations. Standard function call semantics would still apply. I hope that people find that less confusing / unexpected.