3 ms·

Why wrapped in a class? Seems entirely redundant or am I missing something?

• leftnode 5y ago
  Perhaps you could extend the Pipe class and thus the pipe() method returns an object for chainability? That's the only reason I can immediately think of.
• adamrezich 5y ago
  free functions scary
• tored 5y ago
  PHP can't autoload functions, only classes. Thus if you wrap it in a static function inside a class you can autoload the the function by calling the class, Pipe::new(...), without doing a require "file.php".
  • dten 5y ago
    You can add a file import to composer, which is built into vendor/autoload.php automatically. I suppose this allows you to load this as a package...
    • CiaranMcNulty 5y ago
      That's not done lazily which is considered bad
• mkdirp 5y ago
  That's what I was wondering too, especially considering there is a helper function that just wraps it. Seems rather unnecessary. <?php function pipe(...$args) { // Retrive first argument as initial value $value = array_shift($args); // Call the functions passing $value and assign its return foreach($args as $func) $value = $func($value); // Return computed value return $value; } echo pipe("10 WAYS to EAT more HEALTHY", fn($s) => strtolower($s), fn($s) => str_replace(" ", "-", $s) ); Works just as well.
  • zowanet 5y ago
    Passing the first argument as part of the variadic array isn't necessary. Here's my version in only 66 bytes, what do I win? ;) <?php function pipe($v,...$p){foreach($p as$f)$v=$f($v);return$v;}
    • kuroguro 5y ago
      64! (if you don't mind calling a variable). <?php $pipe=fn($v,...$p)=>array_reduce($p,fn($a,$f)=>$f($a),$v);
    • mkdirp 5y ago
      I guess I was just removing the need for an unnecessary class, but that's fair.