Everything

php

[RFC] [Discussion] Improve callbacks in ext/dom and ext/xsl

php.internals

Niels Dossche

2 years ago

Hi internals

I'm opening the discussion for my RFC "Improve callbacks in ext/dom and ext/xsl".
RFC link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improve_callbacks_dom_and_xsl

Kind regards
Niels

Tim Düsterhus

2 years ago

Hi

On 11/7/23 20:32, Niels Dossche wrote:

> I'm opening the discussion for my RFC "Improve callbacks in ext/dom and ext/xsl".
> RFC link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improve_callbacks_dom_and_xsl

Some question that I believe are not answered:

1.

$xpath->registerPhpFunctions([
"foo" => ...
]);

$xpath->registerPhpFunctions([
"foo" => ...
]);

Is this an error due to the duplicate definition or will the last 'foo' win?

2.

$xpath->registerPhpFunctions([]);

Is this an error or a noop?

3.

Would it make sense to deprecate passing a string as "Future Scope"?
Simplifying the method signature would also allow to simplify the
documentation in the long run and registering a string is trivially
fixed by adding square brackets.

In fact looking at the existing documentation at
https://www.php.net/manual/en/domxpath.registerphpfunctions.php, what's
the difference between 'php:function()' and 'php:functionString()'?

Best regards
Tim Düsterhus

Niels Dossche

2 years ago

Hi Tim

On 11/11/23 16:32, Tim Düsterhus wrote:

> Hi
>
> On 11/7/23 20:32, Niels Dossche wrote:
>> I'm opening the discussion for my RFC "Improve callbacks in ext/dom and ext/xsl".
>> RFC link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improve_callbacks_dom_and_xsl
>
> Some question that I believe are not answered:
>
> 1.
>
> $xpath->registerPhpFunctions([
>   "foo" => ...
> ]);
>
> $xpath->registerPhpFunctions([
>   "foo" => ...
> ]);
>
> Is this an error due to the duplicate definition or will the last 'foo' win?

The last 'foo' will win, such that you can override previous definitions.

>
> 2.
>
> $xpath->registerPhpFunctions([]);
>
> Is this an error or a noop?
>

This is a no-op, just like it is the case in current PHP versions.

> 3.
>
> Would it make sense to deprecate passing a string as "Future Scope"? Simplifying the method signature would also allow to simplify the documentation in the long run and registering a string is trivially fixed by adding square brackets.

Maybe, although I personally don't hate it that much.

>
> In fact looking at the existing documentation at https://www.php.net/manual/en/domxpath.registerphpfunctions.php, what's the difference between 'php:function()' and 'php:functionString()'?

The difference is in the returned result.
php:functionString() will case the result to a string automatically for you, while php:function() just returns the result as-is.

>
> Best regards
> Tim Düsterhus

Kind regards
Niels

Niels Dossche

2 years ago

Hi internals

On 07/11/2023 20:32, Niels Dossche wrote:

> Hi internals
>
> I'm opening the discussion for my RFC "Improve callbacks in ext/dom and ext/xsl".
> RFC link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improve_callbacks_dom_and_xsl
>
> Kind regards
> Niels

I have extended the RFC. The new version of the document is 0.2.0.
Now not only do I propose to extend the existing registerPhpFunctions method, I also propose to add a registerPhpFunctionsNS method.
The latter would allow for a nicer syntax and a namespace-aware API that can help to avoid name clashes with many callbacks.

This means there are now two primary votes.

Kind regards
Niels

Niels Dossche

2 years ago

Hi again

On 04/12/2023 23:11, Niels Dossche wrote:

> Hi internals
>
> On 07/11/2023 20:32, Niels Dossche wrote:
>> Hi internals
>>
>> I'm opening the discussion for my RFC "Improve callbacks in ext/dom and ext/xsl".
>> RFC link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improve_callbacks_dom_and_xsl
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Niels
>
> I have extended the RFC. The new version of the document is 0.2.0.
> Now not only do I propose to extend the existing registerPhpFunctions method, I also propose to add a registerPhpFunctionsNS method.
> The latter would allow for a nicer syntax and a namespace-aware API that can help to avoid name clashes with many callbacks.
>
> This means there are now two primary votes.
>
> Kind regards
> Niels

I've updated my RFC again based on some feedback I got privately.
The new document version is 0.3.0.
The change is that instead of registerPhpFunctionsNS I now have registerPhpFunctionNS that no longer uses an array argument, but has a signature of
function registerPhpFunctionNS(string $namespaceURI, string $name, callable $callable): void;
You can consult the diff on the wiki to get up to speed quickly.

Cheers
Niels

Niels Dossche

2 years ago

Hi internals

On 07/11/2023 20:32, Niels Dossche wrote:

> Hi internals
>
> I'm opening the discussion for my RFC "Improve callbacks in ext/dom and ext/xsl".
> RFC link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/improve_callbacks_dom_and_xsl
>
> Kind regards
> Niels

It's been almost 2 weeks since the last change to the RFC, and over a month since the discussion started.
No discussion has happened in the last 2 weeks.
I'd like to move this to voting on Thursday. Due to the holidays I will let the voting run for 3 weeks instead of 2.

Please raise any final remarks or complaints now.

Kind regards
Niels