I don't know if it makes sense, but I expected an empty string in the third example (instead ofnull).

In fact, that was my original problem: there is a command that defines a default value for the "prefix" option. I want to use an empty string as the prefix, but there's no way to tell the command that I want an empty string.

👍 for empty string when given empty..

cmd --foo     => ""cmd           => nullcmd --foo bar => "bar"

Yeah, problem is that the conversion of empty strings to null is a feature (https://github.com/symfony/symfony/blob/master/src/Symfony/Component/Console/Input/ArgvInput.php#L224).
So, should we change this behavior? If we agree, I'll try to do it here.

Imo. the distinction betweennull/default and"" makes sense when compared to the command line.

@ro0NL I think we are talking about different behaviors.

You say:

command            ==> foo = nullcommand --foo      ==> foo = empty stringcommand --foo=""   ==> foo = empty string

And this is what I say:

command            ==> foo = nullcommand --foo      ==> foo = nullcommand --foo=""   ==> foo = empty string

Yep.. you're right. Maybe even better 👍

However i considered it (for my own usecase 👼) as follow

• cmd (foo is default)
• cmd --foo="" (foo is given)
• cmd --foo="bar" (foo is given)
• cmd --foo (foo is null)

In the last scenario i'd like to throw if the command is running non-interactively (--foo requires a value by design), otherwise, if interactive, and--foo is passed, i'd like toask a value.

But you're right, this is a different look at it.

We actually talking about the same :)--foo (null) and--foo="" ("") I wrote it down wrong :)

👍

edit: depends though.. i vote for--foo (when given) beingNULL at all time,not the default value (which can be null).

i vote for --foo (when given) being NULL at all time

It's what this actually fixes:

// beforecmd// $input->getOption('foo') gives the default valuecmd --foo// $input->getOption('foo') gives the default valuecmd --foo=""// $input->getOption('foo') gives the default value// aftercmd// $input->getOption('foo') gives the default valuecmd --foo//  $input->getOption('foo') gives NULLcmd --foo=""// $input->getOption('foo') gives NULL (remaining problem, should give an empty string)

My bad :), your lastafter example sounds really good (with the correct empty string handling).

Maybe for the input definition we could/should make things opt-in?InputOption::VALUE_NULL or so, otherwise im 👍 for the behavior change.

Ie.--foo being NULL vs. default will be a never ending discussion i guess. One can expect both actually..

Ie. --foo being NULL vs. default will be a never ending discussion i guess. One can expect both actually..

IMHO it must benull. You already get the default by callingcmd without the option. Why would you add the option then if you expect the default?

I tend to agree null makes more sense as well.. as it's rather explicit. However, i could understand one saying "no value means the default value", as we technically did not pass a value. Other thennull of course.. or is it void? ;-)

Anyway.. concerning BC.. what about making the behavior opt-in?VALUE_NULL could differ between givingnull (new behavior), or default (old behavior).

what about making the behavior opt-in?

It would add too much complexity to something already quite complex imho, from a code pov as well as from a usage one: readingVALUE_NULL is quite confusing to me, since other constantsVALUE_OPTIONAL andVALUE_REQUIRED are not about using or not the default value but only that the option must take a value or not.
I would say it's a minor behavior break which is acceptable and quite easy to fix (i.e. don't pass--prefix with no value if your option has a default value, no code to change).

About empty strings, I think we can't handle them while keeping a consistent behavior.
Fact is that runningcmd --foo="" orcmd --foo= gives thesame result when looking at$argv, i.e.array('cmd', '--foo=');. So what do we do for the later, null or empty string?
It looks like a PHP limitation (don't know about other languages) and we have to make a choice, giving alwaysnull or always an empty string. I prefernull, as the current implementation gives, fixable using a--no-prefix option.

This fixes the fact that default value is used when giving an empty value, another issue could be opened for the fact that null is returned for an empty string, but I'm afraid we can't fix without totally changing the way we get and parse the input (and I don't see how actually).
/cc@javiereguiluz@fabpot

I would say it's a minor behavior break which is acceptable and quite easy to fix

👍

Imo.--foo= equals--foo="". The trailing= is trivial here.

@ro0NL I don't think it's the same: An empty string is not the same as null. To me,--foo and--foo= means that there is no value, sonull. However,--foo='' is different because we are passing an empty string as the value, so there is a value and it's an empty string.

But quotes are optional..--foo=bar equals--foo="bar" as well (and equals--foo bar).

However, --foo='' is different because we are passing an empty string as the value, so there is a value and it's an empty string

Sadly, regarding php it is not:

// php cli.php --foo='bar'dump(getopt('', ['foo::']));// ["foo" => "bar"]dump($argv);// [0 => "cli.php", 1 => "--foo=bar"]//  php cli.php  --foo=dump(getopt('', ['foo::']));// []dump($argv);// [0 => "cli.php", 1 => "--foo="]//  php cli.php --foo=''dump(getopt('', ['foo::']));// []dump($argv);// [0 => "cli.php", 1 => "--foo="]

But:

//  php cli.php --foo="''"dump(getopt('', ['foo::']));// []dump($argv);// [0 => "cli.php", 1 => "--foo=''"]

edit: For the record, I tried some of the most used CLI packages (hoa/console,auraphp/Aura.Cli,nategood/commando andc9s/CLIFramework) and none of them behave "perfectly" regarding our need. The fact we usenull for no-value and not an empty string looks debatable and could be reconsidered, both have pros and cons.

@chalasr OK. It's clear now that this problem has no solution because of PHP. We should instead add a note in the docs explaining that you cannot pass an empty string as the value of an option. Thanks for investigating this!

@javiereguiluz As explained in#21215 (comment), there is actually 2 different issues:

• Passing an option with no value or an empty value actually returns the default value of the option, so we can't know if the option was explicitly specified or not
• Passing an option with only quotes (empty string) is not detectable when using= as separator

The former can be solved by returningnull instead of the default value (or any other empty value, but the current implementation usesnull), unlocking the ability to know that the option was specified but empty, letting up to the developer to changenull to an empty value of any primitive type, or use the default value. That is what is proposed here.

The latter is either full white or full black: we have to use an empty value of a predefined primitive type (currentlynull) to return when the option is specified with no value or an empty string.
We could have returned an empty string instead of null (as we are forced to return the same in all cases i.e.cmd --foo,--foo=,--foo="" and--foo ""),but I do think it's not a big deal (fixed), as one would complain that he wantsnull when using--foo, for sure.
However, it is no more a blocking issue as soon as we have the fix made here, because we are aware of that the option has been specified empty, so we can easily convertnull to the value of our choice (some CLI libraries allow to set a type on the option beforehand for handling these cases differently depending on the need, it could be a way to improve the situation in a next time, not sure it's worth it though).

The implicit empty string to null conversion as mentioned before, should be fixed at least imo.; looking athttps://github.com/symfony/symfony/blob/v3.2.2/src/Symfony/Component/Console/Input/ArgvInput.php#L145 we already detect the difference between a value an no value depending on=. So this works counter-wise.

Including this PR the only drawback seems we cant differ between--foo and--foo "", which right now doesnt work either (gives default, after it gives null).

I looked at improving the situation for empty strings, here is what I end up with:

Code

$application =newApplication();$application    ->register('echo')    ->addOption('prefix',null, InputOption::VALUE_OPTIONAL,null,'my-default')    ->addArgument('value', InputArgument::REQUIRED)    ->setCode(function ($input,$output) {var_dump($input->getOption('prefix'));    });$application->run();

Before this PR

After

We get the default value only when don't passing the option explicitly.
I think we are good. What do you think?

Looks really good :) can you confirm--opt-long --opt-long2 are bothnull? Or vice-versa... does--opt-long "" --opt-long2 works out?

I think the latter is an edge case where you getnull for--opt-long right?

Any thought here?

changelog updated, ping deciders

This looks like a BC break to me (and the fact that you added a note in the CHANGELOG confirms that feeling). So, I think that's not something that can be merged in 2.7, master would be ok if clearly documented.

@fabpot rebased on master and documented.

Thank you@chalasr.

Thanks@chalasr. Made my day 😊