[BC Break] Practical design: Concrete classes and benchmarking

[gabbydgab]

Currently, ArrayUtils class has many responsibility, thus breaking it into specific usage will open more opportunities to enhance its features - also to properly benchmark edge cases of each functionality (e.g. caching validation and array merging strategies)

Responsibilities

1. Validation Strategies
   • hasStringKey
   • hasIntegerKey
   • hasNumericKeys
   • isList
   • isHashTable
   • isCachable (proposed/new feature)
2. Merging Strategies
   • Integer and String Keys
   • Integer and String With Preserved Numeric Keys
   • Recursive Merging
   • Merging with Null arrays
   • Replacing/Removing Keys
   • Prioritized Merging (proposed/new feature)
3. Filtering Strategies
   • Without key filtering
   • Key specific filtering
   • With and without key filtering
4. Iterator to Array Conversion Strategies
   • Simple Iterator
   • Recursive Iterator

Benchmarking

Benchmarking the merging and caching strategies is a MUST.

One way of validating performance issue is to benchmark, especially, configuration from Zend\ServiceManager, Zend\View, Zend\Router, etc.

[gabbydgab]

@Ocramius @weierophinney Thoughts?

[Ocramius]

@gabbydgab stop any dev work: if this is a split, just make it a split and stop there, with 0 API and functional changes. Further dev to be done once it is under the organisation again.

[gabbydgab]

@Ocramius yes, already split the library and tagged it as version 0.1.x (same with master) - including the initial benchmarks (version 0.1.1). With regards to benchmarks, I would like to update them using a practical configuration - larger from what is being tested. Probably will add it as version 0.1.2.

I'm waiting for @weierophinney approval to transfer this repository back to the organization.

I'll be adding more issues that might be needed, like sorting, search and merging by priority.

[Ocramius]

Then please wait until it's moved back: one thing at a time, or else this will just become a mess, and we'll have to start over.

…

On 10 Jan 2017 6:27 a.m., "Gab Amba" ***@***.***> wrote: @Ocramius <https://github.com/Ocramius> yes, already split the library and tagged it as version 0.1.x (same with master) - including the initial benchmarks (version 0.1.1). With regards to benchmarks, I would like to update them using a practical configuration - larger from what is being tested. Probably will add it as version 0.1.2. I'm for @weierophinney <https://github.com/weierophinney> approval to transfer this repository back to the organization. I'll be adding more issues that might be needed, like sorting, search and merging by priority. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJakDzIoaX2t97_zMjrsCu4uN-Y2RELks5rQxbBgaJpZM4Le-0_> .