functions.xml Eliminate confusion in fn's parameters and arguments

[mmalferov]

If we agree that a) parameters are part of the function signature, i.e. an integral part of the function declaration, and b) arguments are information that comes to the function from the outside, then we must eliminate confusion in the text. To simplify it: the arguments are passed, and the parameters take values from the arguments and, after argument's expression are evaluated, set values for their parameters. If so, there seem to be inconsistent places in the text where parameters are passed and functions take parameters rather than arguments or something like that

[Girgias]

This whole section needs a rewrite and reorganisation as how we talk about functions currently is clunky AF.

[mmalferov]

If the current proposal does not contain errors, can we at least accept them and make global changes later? I have already made changes to the Russian version and received criticism from colleagues for the fact that the translation text deviates from the original. But I can't leave the literal translation either, because the current original confuses the reader by calling arguments parameters and vice versa. I would like the function parameters to remain parameters, and the arguments that the function receives from the outside to remain arguments.

[kamil-tekiela]

In general, this is a good change. I think we should merge it after few adjustments.

These terms matter mostly when there's ambiguity about what is discussed. In a lot of cases, you could use either term and it would still make sense.

[kamil-tekiela]

Doesn't this apply to argument list also?

[mmalferov]

This apply to argument list also, but in the example we see only list of parameters, but not the function call with aruments and trailing comma ;)

And from the context of the following sentence (even in the previous formulation), it is clear that we are talking about parameters — more precisely, about long parameter names in the function signature.

Perhaps the permissibility of passing arguments with an trailing comma should also be mentioned and an example of calling a function with a list of arguments and an trailing comma should be given.

[kamil-tekiela]

Perhaps the permissibility of passing arguments with an trailing comma should also be mentioned and an example of calling a function with a list of arguments and an trailing comma should be given.

Perhaps you can do it in the next PR.

[kamil-tekiela]

Is this correct? I am actually confused about this whole sentence.

[mmalferov]

I understand it this way:

<?php

function someFn($one, $two, ...$other) {} // OK

function someFn(...$other, $one, $two) {} // Wrong (Only the last parameter can be variadic)

For example, after such a call someFn(1) the $other will stay an empty. But when the calling someFn(1, 2, 3, 4, 5), the trailing arguments (i.e. 3, 4, and 5) that don't match a positional argument (i.e. 1 and 2) will be added to the array ($other).

The paragraph looks like the correct text

[kamil-tekiela]

Right, this paragraph needs to be rewritten for clarity, but not in this PR. Maybe I will submit one PR later.

[kamil-tekiela]

Thanks. It looks good to me and a definite improvement.

[kamil-tekiela]

Right, this paragraph needs to be rewritten for clarity, but not in this PR. Maybe I will submit one PR later.