[5.6] FileSystem returns files and directories sorted by name #23387
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Would this need any tests so that it stays this way? |
GrahamCampbell
changed the title
This was referenced Apr 15, 2018
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A change made last year to version 5.5 changed the behavior of the
FileSystem files()method:0665f95#diff-3aea724aa0501a58dc0f933de2be07e7
Previously
files()would return the list of files in alphabetical order. Since that change, the returned array is no longer sorted alphabetically by name. As the returned object is an array ofSplFileSystemobjects, sorting the result set in userland isn't as simple as just callingsort(). However, sorting the result set inside theFileSystemclass is dead easy.Many developers may prefer the
FileSystemclass to return arrays of things sorted by name, as per the original behavior. At the very least it seems like a nice convenience that shouldn't negatively impact anybody who doesn't need this behavior.