Comments on: What I learned of PHP by ignoring it for three months

By: Jan Hancic

Jan Hancic — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:38:29 +0000

Ok admin told me that PHP 5.3 is not yet available for BSD which we use. It’s still being ported :S
Once it is we’ll upgrade at once …

By: Jan Hancic

Jan Hancic — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:34:00 +0000

Oh and PHP wizards have no intentions of implementing $obj->Method ()[0]

there is a thread in their bug tracker (under feature requests) and they said that they won’t do it. Don’t know why though …

By: Jan Hancic

Jan Hancic — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:25:12 +0000

God dammit I thought we ware running 5.3 on our servers, looks like we have 5.2
I will tell our admins to upgrade ASAP so you can play with the new features …

By: gasper_k

gasper_k — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 12:59:47 +0000

> Seriously, the $obj->method()->method() is already possible? I didn’t know that, cool

Yes, since 5.0.0 (July 2004).

By: swizec

swizec — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 11:00:44 +0000

Seriously, the $obj->method()->method() is already possible? I didn’t know that, cool

As for the second poing, yeah you could do the associative array but just look at all the semantic fluff around that. WHY!? I’d much rather just define an array as [1,2,3] thankyouverymuch

Yep I’ve used associative arrays to get around named arguments, but, again, it just makes the code incredibly fugly.

Well I guess we agree on the need for object literals (although if it could be expanded to support arrays in such a manner it’d be even better) and … well as for everything else, guess I can’t wait for 5.3 then. Looks like it’s going to be a big step forward.

By: gasper_k

gasper_k — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:52:35 +0000

you need to clarify your point 1, because I’m not sure what you mean:
– “you can use objects right out of a function”. It’s already possible to do $obj->method()->anothermethod(); and I think with 5.3 it’s also possible to do new Object()->method(). Not sure, though.
– “” . $object calls __toString() on object
– and I think getRows()[0] is possible with 5.3, although I’m again not sure.

I may also be misunderstanding the second point, because I don’t really see an issue with “Why can’t I do a return { x: 0, y: 100 }? Or something like that?”, you can do “something like that” with array(‘x’ => 0, ‘y’ => 100), which can be passed as an argument and whatnot.

I’ve rarely used named arguments in Python, so I think it’s a decent shortcut, but not a big deal. I think I missed it only once or twice in PHP, and the first time I went with associative arrays to go around it, the second time I just used the ordinary named arguments, because it’s not really worth bothering.

The things I’ve missed the most are object literals (hopefully we’ll get these soon), anonymous functions (coming with 5.3 yay!), and namespaces (5.3). I don’t like long named classes, so namespaces are very good for organizing the code, and I really hate that I have to specify a function every time I want to have a callback. So, again, yay.

btw, livenetlife steals focus from input boxes. annoying.

By: swizec

swizec — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:01:13 +0000

Navadil sem se na netu po anglesk pisat

V glavnem to kar pravis, da sem spregledal je “keyword arguments”, tretja tocka.

Ostale tocke pa ne pokriva samo javascript, pokrivajo jih prakticno vsi razen PHP.

=== nearly equivalent translation for others ===

What you’re saying I missed is called “keyword arguments” and is covered under bullet point #3, and everything else isn’t just a feature of Javascript, but rather pretty much any language other than PHP that I’ve tried.

By: Boštjan

Boštjan — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:47:01 +0000

I see you like javascript

There’s something you missed, but it’s more a wish than a real problem:

function something(string $a, int $b, array $c, (anything if not specified) $d)

It would be nice if it worked

Ma ne morš u slovenš?ini napisat da se morm jst kle zajebavat s svojo slabo angleš?ino ane.