Hey Tim and Barel,
On 18.5.2026 22:11:38, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 5/18/26 22:00, Barel wrote:
>> I started the vote on this RFC:
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_get_and_array_has
>
> As for the RFC itself - I voted against the RFC for the reasons that I
> mentioned in this email (non-array should error, not default):
> https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/130667
I actually think non-array should cause default behaviour, the same as
missing.
The part which I don't quite agree with is having null as default - I'd
rather have an error when the path does not exist, by default, and to
default to a default value you need to explicitly specify it.
I also would suggest to replace a pure exists by a number how many parts
of the path are missing.
E.g. array_path_missing($array, $path).
$path = ["foo", 0, "bar"];
if (array_path_missing($array, $path) == 0) // found.
if ($missing = array_path_missing($array, $path)) { die("Error: Key " .
implode(".", array_slice($path, 0, -$missing)) . " missing"); }
Which lends itself pretty nicely to trivial nested array verification.
Overall I really liked this RFC, just the default behaviour of
missing/non-array path entry is a bit disappointing.
I hope it'll be resubmitted with slight improvements there!
Thanks,
Bob
