`PDO::FETCH_CONSTRUCTOR` fetch mode proposal

php.internals

Frederik van der Els

2 years ago
Hi internals, First off, please excuse me if I’ve done something wrong related to the usage of the mailing list. This all is completely new to me. I hereby want to propose a new fetch mode for PDO. I’ve detailed the motivation for it on GitHub. I haven’t actually written the code for it, but it should not be too difficult. I look forward to hearing from you. Kind regards, Frederik van der Els

Niels Dossche

2 years ago
Hi Frederik On 18/01/2024 21:21, Frederik van der Els wrote:
> Hi internals, > > First off, please excuse me if I’ve done something wrong related to the usage of the mailing list. This all is completely new to me. > > I hereby want to propose a new fetch mode for PDO. I’ve detailed the motivation for it on GitHub. I haven’t actually written the code for it, but it should not be too difficult. > > I look forward to hearing from you. > > Kind regards, > > > Frederik van der Els >
Just putting the link here so people find it more easily :-) https://github.com/php/php-src/issues/13174 Cheers Niels

Frederik van der Els

2 years ago
On 2024-01-18 21:23, Niels Dossche wrote:
> Hi Frederik > Just putting the link here so people find it more easily :-) > > https://github.com/php/php-src/issues/13174 > > Cheers > Niels
Thank you, the link was originally on the text "on GitHub" but it seems to have been stripped.

Saki Takamachi

2 years ago
Hi Frederik
> First off, please excuse me if I’ve done something wrong related to the usage of the mailing list. This all is completely new to me.
Welcome to the internal mailing list! I had looked the pull request, and I'm pleased to have received your email promptly.
> Thank you, the link was originally on the text "on GitHub" but it seems to have been stripped.
Since mailing lists are text rather than HTML, you cannot attach links to strings.
> I hereby want to propose a new fetch mode for PDO. I’ve detailed the motivation for it on GitHub. I haven’t actually written the code for it, but it should not be too difficult.
Now, I agree that it is often not possible to use `PDO::FETCH_CLASS` because DB column names are typically snake case and variables and properties are camel case. IMHO, passing arguments to the constructor in order is a good approach, but I think another option would be to give attributes to properties and map data appropriately when using PDO::FETCH_CLASS. e.g. ``` #[ColumnName('user_name')] private string $userName; ``` In addition to the concerns mentioned in the pull request, I'm also concerned that more modes with similar functionality will confuse users. Regards. Saki

Alexander Pravdin

2 years ago
I would also suggest supporting readonly classes and creating special attributes to help map data fields to constructor arguments. Something like this: readonly class User { public function __construct( #[PDOField('user_id')] public string $userId, #[PDOField('user_name')] public string $userName, #[PDOField('user_address')] public ?string $userAddress = '', // Optional field with default value ); }
-- Best regards, Alex On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:05 AM Saki Takamachi <saki@sakiot.com> wrote:

Lynn

2 years ago
On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:51 AM Alexander Pravdin <alex.pravdin@interi.co> wrote:
> I would also suggest supporting readonly classes and creating special > attributes to help map data fields to constructor arguments. Something like > this: > > readonly class User { > public function __construct( > #[PDOField('user_id')] > public string $userId, > #[PDOField('user_name')] > public string $userName, > #[PDOField('user_address')] > public ?string $userAddress = '', // Optional field with default > value > ); > } > > -- > Best regards, > Alex > > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:05 AM Saki Takamachi <saki@sakiot.com> wrote: > > > Hi Frederik > > > > > First off, please excuse me if I’ve done something wrong related to the > > usage of the mailing list. This all is completely new to me. > > > > Welcome to the internal mailing list! I had looked the pull request, and > > I'm pleased to have received your email promptly. > > > > > Thank you, the link was originally on the text "on GitHub" but it seems > > to have been stripped. > > > > Since mailing lists are text rather than HTML, you cannot attach links to > > strings. > > > > > I hereby want to propose a new fetch mode for PDO. I’ve detailed the > > motivation for it on GitHub. I haven’t actually written the code for it, > > but it should not be too difficult. > > > > Now, I agree that it is often not possible to use `PDO::FETCH_CLASS` > > because DB column names are typically snake case and variables and > > properties are camel case. > > > > IMHO, passing arguments to the constructor in order is a good approach, > > but I think another option would be to give attributes to properties and > > map data appropriately when using PDO::FETCH_CLASS. > > > > e.g. > > ``` > > #[ColumnName('user_name')] > > private string $userName; > > ``` > > > > In addition to the concerns mentioned in the pull request, I'm also > > concerned that more modes with similar functionality will confuse users. > > > > Regards. > > > > Saki > > -- > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > >
Would it be interesting to see if there's a way to make the hydration of objects more standard in PHP? PDO could then use that underlying implementation, but so could every existing library, or even PHP extension (SOAP/XML/JSON) that does anything related to object hydration/(de)serialization. I'm looking at Symfony, Doctrine, and all the other serialization/hydration/auto-mapper library maintainers) for this because I wouldn't be able to design this myself.

Larry Garfield

2 years ago
On Fri, Jan 19, 2024, at 9:47 AM, Lynn wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:51 AM Alexander Pravdin <alex.pravdin@interi.co> > wrote: > >> I would also suggest supporting readonly classes and creating special >> attributes to help map data fields to constructor arguments. Something like >> this: >> >> readonly class User { >> public function __construct( >> #[PDOField('user_id')] >> public string $userId, >> #[PDOField('user_name')] >> public string $userName, >> #[PDOField('user_address')] >> public ?string $userAddress = '', // Optional field with default >> value >> ); >> }
*snip*
>> > Now, I agree that it is often not possible to use `PDO::FETCH_CLASS` >> > because DB column names are typically snake case and variables and >> > properties are camel case. >> > >> > IMHO, passing arguments to the constructor in order is a good approach, >> > but I think another option would be to give attributes to properties and >> > map data appropriately when using PDO::FETCH_CLASS. >> > >> > e.g. >> > ``` >> > #[ColumnName('user_name')] >> > private string $userName; >> > ``` >> > >> > In addition to the concerns mentioned in the pull request, I'm also >> > concerned that more modes with similar functionality will confuse users. >> > >> > Regards. >> > >> > Saki >> > -- >> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php >> > >> > >> > > Would it be interesting to see if there's a way to make the hydration of > objects more standard in PHP? PDO could then use that > underlying implementation, but so could every existing library, or even PHP > extension (SOAP/XML/JSON) that does anything related to object > hydration/(de)serialization. I'm looking at Symfony, Doctrine, and all the > other serialization/hydration/auto-mapper library maintainers) for this > because I wouldn't be able to design this myself.
Hi, maintainer of Crell/Serde here, as requested. :-) I am highly skeptical that any serious standardization could happen in core directly. Not because of incompatibility between existing libraries really (we can adapt), but because the problem space is a lot more complex than it first seems, and that complexity means there's many valid but incompatible ways to go about it. Just to use the name example, for Serde, I support a `serializedName` declaration on a given property, but also a `renameWith` declaration that specifies different rules for processing the name. There's built-in options like Prefix('some_string_'), case folding via enum objects (like Cases::snake_case), and you can put an arbitrary object on it as long as it's all compile-time defined. (Eg, you can do a suffix one if you want, but I don't provide it.) The `renameWith` directive can also be put on the class level, and that will apply to all properties unless otherwise specified. Then I'm in the process of adding renaming capability that's tied to when flattening nested objects. And that's just for naming things. How much of that should be standardized? How much should PHP do itself, and how much is better left for either de-facto standardization or FIG? If we do just a little bit (such as a strict `#[SerializedName('some_string')]` attribute and nothing else), does that make it more difficult to do more complex things like I do? Something like `#[SerializedName]` is probably safe enough to do that it wouldn't cause problems, but then what does it actually do *in core* rather than just be a common name for Serde, Symfony, etc. to use? Does serialize() use it? What then happens on unserialize()? How does that interact with __serialize()/__unserialize()? And that's *just* naming things. That's before we even get into type mapping, flattening, defaults, post-deserialize validation, and all the other stuff. So it's possible we could do something here, but it will require a lot of thought and care to not paint ourselves into a corner. Regarding PDO hydration in particular, while a `#[SerializedName]` attribute or similar seems nice, that immediately runs into a problem. What if you want to use that object for populating from a DB, as well as for round-tripping from JSON? Are you locked into the same name in both cases? If not, how do you differentiate them? I have a solution for that in Serde, Symfony Serializer has something similar, but is that something that we want to bake into core? If not, does that mean we cannot support multi-format serializing rules in the future? Additionally, while we're talking mostly about names here, there's also the question of types. Postgres, for instance, supports a much wider set of column types than PDO. For instance, it supports typed array columns (array of ints, array of strings, etc.). PDO sees those as strings, which you need to then parse back out into something, and that parsing is not trivial, because reasons. So if doing a FETCH_CONSTRUCTOR approach, would you need to accept a string in the constructor, then parse it to an array in the body? That precludes using CPP. That's before we even get to custom types, which are sort of like object properties and would probably map to that. But... Is that reasonable to built in by default? How, exactly? All of which is to say that while I would love to make PDO better and the serialization/deserialization story better, I think it's too complex to be really *solved* in core. If anything, we should focus on asking what would make it easier to build user-space wrappers *on* PDO that do that more complex stuff (renaming, type translation, etc.) in user-space. I'm not convinced that FETCH_CONSTRUCTOR would be a net improvement or if it would get in the way of that more complex stuff. I could still be convinced of it, though, if we can be reasonably confident that it doesn't have unintended negative consequences to future design, the way readonly did. --Larry Garfield

Frederik van der Els

2 years ago
Hi Alexander,
> I would also suggest supporting readonly classes and creating special > attributes to help map data fields to constructor arguments. Something > like > this: > > readonly class User { > public function __construct( > #[PDOField('user_id')] > public string $userId, > #[PDOField('user_name')] > public string $userName, > #[PDOField('user_address')] > public ?string $userAddress = '', // Optional field with > default > value > ); > }
When the constructor is used to create the class, readonly classes should be automatically supported by this new fetch mode right? And indeed, it would be useful to use named parameters if available. I overlooked this possibility in my response to Saki. Kind regards, Frederik van der Els

Frederik van der Els

2 years ago
Hi Saki,
> Welcome to the internal mailing list! I had looked the pull request, > and I'm pleased to have received your email promptly.
Thank you!
> Now, I agree that it is often not possible to use `PDO::FETCH_CLASS` > because DB column names are typically snake case and variables and > properties are camel case. > > IMHO, passing arguments to the constructor in order is a good > approach, but I think another option would be to give attributes to > properties and map data appropriately when using PDO::FETCH_CLASS. > > e.g. > ``` > #[ColumnName('user_name')] > private string $userName; > ```
The main motivation for this new fetch mode is the fact that it is now infeasible to use the constructor. You would expect to use `PDO::FETCH_CLASS` for it, as you're trying to create a class, but that is impossible entirely. You need to resort to a hacky usage of `PDO::FETCH_FUNC`, which in my view is unwanted. A nice consequence of using the constructor is that the casings need not match. I like the idea of using annotations, but they solve a different problem I think.
> In addition to the concerns mentioned in the pull request, I'm also > concerned that more modes with similar functionality will confuse > users.
That is a valid concern. When I first starting looking into this I was also a bit overwhelmed by the amount of possibilities one has. I think giving an appropriate name to this new fetch mode is therefore important. I thought of `PDO::FETCH_CONSTRUCTOR`, but I'm happy to hear other ideas. Kind regards, Frederik van der Els