[2.0] Add new methods Collection::findFirst and Collection::reduce

[VincentLanglet]

This is two methods I find useful for the next major.

Collection::find has a better performance than using Collection::filter then Collection::first.

Collection::reduce is similar to array_reduce.

I create this PR to open the discussion about these methods.

[greg0ire]

You should probably add docs at https://github.com/doctrine/collections/blob/1.6.x/docs/en/index.rst

[SenseException]

You should probably add docs at https://github.com/doctrine/collections/blob/1.6.x/docs/en/index.rst

Probably the 2.0 docs if this is for the next major release.

[VincentLanglet]

I added the documentation.

Tests fail

[VincentLanglet]

@ostrolucky Sorry for the delay ; I made the changes you asked :)

[ostrolucky]

Parameters are required to specify. Please make sure whole definition works in psalm.dev https://psalm.dev/r/61a6394fe6

[ostrolucky]

Still not it https://psalm.dev/r/b66b6e6a60

[VincentLanglet]

Still not it https://psalm.dev/r/b66b6e6a60

I think your test is wrong since you're passing string to array_reduce. @ostrolucky

See https://psalm.dev/r/6ca84608e3

[VincentLanglet]

Is there anything missing to be merged ?

[ostrolucky]

I don't think so. I am not sure who is responsible for doctrine/collections though.

[greg0ire]

Thanks @VincentLanglet !

[VincentLanglet]

Thanks @VincentLanglet !

You're welcome.

By the way, I saw multiple times that creating a release 2.0 seems impossible since the library will have difficulties to migrate from version 1 and 2. But when I looked at the 2.0 branches, the changes are currently:

• Some method are added to the interface.
• Some return type hint are added.
  Which means that if you're compatible with the 2.0 version, you're still compatible with the v1.

What about focusing the feature of the v2 on this point ? (Being compatible with the v2 should allow to be compatible with the v1 easily). For instance:

• [2.0] Callable instead of Closure #231 ; can be easily done since a Closure is a callable, if the method supports the callable, it still supports the closure and work with the v1.
• [2.0] Use null instead of false on failure #190 ; can not be done since if you return null, you're not compatible with the v1.

With this strategy, a reachable 2.0 milestone could be created and released ; Wdyt ?

[ostrolucky]

If 2.0 is created now, it will mean we have to create 3.0 for new features/BC breaks, so that's unlikely. It's not worth creating 2.0 at this point IMHO, there are not that many changes.

[VincentLanglet]

If 2.0 is created now, it will mean we have to create 3.0 for new features/BC breaks, so that's unlikely. It's not worth creating 2.0 at this point IMHO, there are not that many changes.

I didn't ask for creating 2.0 now. But for a reachable milestone.
Almost 0 issue are flagged with the milestone https://github.com/doctrine/collections/issues?q=is%3Aissue+milestone%3A2.0.0+is%3Aopen and the only one will break the support of 1.x.

The last major version was in 2013, I'm sure they are some things which can be improved and allow librairies to support both ^1 || ^2.

[Brammm]

Derp, I was just about to create a PR for a similar findFirst method. Is there any reason this is going in 2.0 and not 1.x?

[VincentLanglet]

Derp, I was just about to create a PR for a similar findFirst method. Is there any reason this is going in 2.0 and not 1.x?

Adding a method to an interface is a BC-break.

[Brammm]

Hadn't considered that. Thanks for explaining.

…

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021, 18:06 Vincent Langlet, ***@***.***> wrote: Derp, I was just about to create a PR for a similar findFirst method. Is there any reason this is going in 2.0 and not 1.x? Adding a method to an interface is a BC-break. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#252 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGP35KHUPHIGZQWLBEM5ELTTIMPDANCNFSM4P5JCYGA> .

[fnagel]

@VincentLanglet Both methods are not part of the UPGRADE.md file or am I missing something?