php.net |  support |  documentation |  report a bug |  advanced search |  search howto |  statistics |  random bug |  login

go to bug id or search bugs for

Doc Bug #79673 "roughly equivalent to" without explaining the difference
Submitted: 2020-06-04 11:21 UTC Modified: 2021-02-01 17:21 UTC
From: kasperheij at hotmail dot com Assigned:
Status: Verified Package: Documentation problem
PHP Version: 7.4.6 OS:
Private report: No CVE-ID: None
View Add Comment Developer Edit
Welcome back! If you're the original bug submitter, here's where you can edit the bug or add additional notes.
If this is not your bug, you can add a comment by following this link.
If this is your bug, but you forgot your password, you can retrieve your password here.
Password:
Status:
Package:
Bug Type:
Summary:
From: kasperheij at hotmail dot com
New email:
PHP Version: OS:

 

 [2020-06-04 11:21 UTC] kasperheij at hotmail dot com 
Description:
------------
---
From manual page: https://php.net/migration74.new-features
---

```
<?php
$array['key'] ??= computeDefault();
// is roughly equivalent to
if (!isset($array['key'])) {
    $array['key'] = computeDefault();
}
?>
```

"// is roughly equivalent to" says that there _is_ a difference without specifying this delta.

Patches

Add a Patch

Pull Requests

Add a Pull Request

History

AllCommentsChangesGit/SVN commitsRelated reports
 [2020-06-10 18:18 UTC] alexinbeijing at gmail dot com 
Interesting question!

I can't find any difference in the actual behavior, although the bytecodes executed by the interpreter are different in either case, so it is possible that there might be some (very small) difference in performance.

See:

https://3v4l.org/Z3dPV/vld#output
https://3v4l.org/2W7W1/vld#output
 [2020-06-17 21:54 UTC] a at b dot c dot de 
The "??=" operator isn't mentioned at all in the reference part of the documentation (under neither "comparison operators", where the base '??' is given; nor "assignment operators", which description of "combined operators" hasn't been updated). One of those would be the place to describe its behaviour and how it's different from the more long-winded form.
 [2021-02-01 17:21 UTC] cmb@php.net 
The problem is that the original RFC[1] was underspecified[2], and
the final implementation[3] turned out to be much harder than
expected.

Anyhow, I think the given code snippets are equivalent, even if
`$array instanceof ArrayAccess`.  However, if the literal 'key'
would be replaced with a function call, the function would only be
called once with the ??= operator, but may be called twice with
the "rough equivalent"[4].

> The "??=" operator isn't mentioned at all in the reference part
> of the documentation […]

This has been fixed in the meantime[5], but the given equivalence
is wrong.

[1] <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/null_coalesce_equal_operator>
[2] <https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1795#issuecomment-387184002>
[3] <https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/3747>
[4] <https://3v4l.org/ITSK6>
[5] <https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.operators.assignment.php#language.operators.assignment.other>
 [2021-02-01 17:21 UTC] cmb@php.net
-Status: Open +Status: Verified
 [2023-01-05 08:11 UTC] alisaudfxbpn53 at gmail dot com 
That was so amazing. 

(https://www.partycityfeedback.net/)github.com
 
PHP Copyright © 2001-2024 The PHP Group
All rights reserved. 		Last updated: Fri Apr 26 16:01:29 2024 UTC