Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:104732
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAF+90c9YZcrquGfS4h3x1a+codkCFLarAThsOXcN69RCTvbAFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAwdEzCgJjRsBF9Ecd00sDu9YuFJVKA-kE_o08nzBP8zHq_1-Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAwdEzCgJjRsBF9Ecd00sDu9YuFJVKA-kE_o08nzBP8zHq_1-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 09:30:32 +0000
Message-ID: <CALKiJKrPL5zZhrHcT2ouuXOf-_V8HDVqEYPe6VreX_Nqdu6TqQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005896e305841eb128"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Arrow functions / short closures
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

--0000000000005896e305841eb128
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 at 09:01, Alexandru P=C4=83tr=C4=83nescu <drealecs@gmai=
l.com>
wrote:

> My question would be: whatever syntax we are going to use that has arrow
> syntax, let's say *$f =3D \($x) =3D> $x * 2;* are we going to also suppor=
t the
> arrow block version?:
> *$f =3D \($x) =3D> {*
> *    // more operations that will have better visible on multi-line*
>
> *    return $x * 2;*
> *}*
>


See "Future Scope" in the RFC:

> This feature is omitted in this RFC, because the value-proposition of
this syntax is much smaller: Once you have multiple statements, the
relative overhead of the conventional closure syntax becomes small.

We shouldn't pick a syntax that rules it out, but it can be added later,
with a separate RFC to discuss the benefits and details.

Regards,
--=20
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]

--0000000000005896e305841eb128--