Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:108485
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAD5P3=JwFK03L-DWJYaa0dbBj1chbef_=K-vyawLNeoAz7dHjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALSrLtYm+TSEwo+05JC6LXrQsfzb32pQ24Y7gDUmm-7+NwYi8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOWwgpm43=hoCvsskq2qyhB3yVxntLAYC8hQjQwd9dnvQ=GKkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD5P3=L8bQ4bp5i5f=SdOP-=Wmn6TSj6+4Jzw76WRwJ=89evtw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAF+90c-myY2NeKcaTRH3zDcwxRC95RhKnm1MPTGN68WUq4RPAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPKYkKy-NwDmpN_5Zet8Oz9JLVzu11PmODP6byBYuJry3TUvbg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPKYkKy-NwDmpN_5Zet8Oz9JLVzu11PmODP6byBYuJry3TUvbg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 16:13:34 +0100
Message-ID: <CAD5P3=K5UHUyfJD4prjhyEuUqkNuuHcLzq_DiLMX-KE644eo5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chase Peeler <chasepeeler@gmail.com>
Cc: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com>, 
	Diogo Galvao <diogo86@gmail.com>, PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC]
From: manuelcanga@gmail.com (Manuel Canga)

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 15:51, Chase Peeler <chasepeeler@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 8:19 AM Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 1:43 PM Manuel Canga <manuelcanga@gmail.com> wro=
te:
>>
>> > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 13:16, Nicolas Grekas
>> > <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Le mar. 11 f=C3=A9vr. 2020 =C3=A0 12:52, Diogo Galvao <diogo86@gmail=
.com> a =C3=A9crit
>> > :
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 8:14 AM Manuel Canga <manuelcanga@gmail.com=
>
>> > wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Hi internals,
>> > >> > I Would like to present a possible new "::func resolution" for yo=
ur
>> > >> > consideration.
>> > >> ...
>> > >> > use function \My\I18N\i18n_translate;
>> > >> >
>> > >> > $mapped_array =3D array_map(i18n_translate::func, $array);
>> > >> ...
>> > >> > What is your opinion ? Do you see it useful ?
>> > >>
>> > >> I've wished for this on many occasions and think it'd be really use=
ful,
>> > as long
>> > >> as it could work with methods as well:
>> > >>
>> > >> $mapped_array =3D array_map(I18N::translate::function, $array);
>> > >>
>> > >> For what it's worth I guess it could just return [I18N::class,
>> > 'translate'].
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > I wish this would return a Closure instead, making $foo::function th=
e
>> > equivalent of Closure::fromCallable($foo).
>> >
>> > Hi, Nicolas,
>> >
>> > Currently, when <class_name>::class is used, class with <class_name>
>> > can or cannot exists in that moment.
>> > Using <function_name>::func( or <function_name>::function ), I think
>> > should keep the same behavior.
>> >
>> > Using ::func as alias of "Closure::fromCallable" check if function
>> > exists in that moment. It is certainly useful, but, I think it's more
>> > important be consistent
>> >
>>
>> Checking whether the function exists is really unavoidable for functions=
,
>> because you don't know whether
>>
>> namespace Foo;
>> var_dump(strlen::function);
>>
>> refers to 'Foo\strlen' or 'strlen', without first trying to look up the
>> former.
>>
>> I agree with Nicolas that this kind of feature would provide the most va=
lue
>> if it created a Closure. This would circumvent all the issues outlined i=
n
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/consistent_callables.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nikita
>
>
> Can anyone thing of a use-case where you would want a string name of a fu=
nction and a callable would not be acceptable, besides possibly debugging c=
ode that said 'echo "I'm calling ".myfunction::function;'? Everything that =
I can think of that accepts a function name, also accepts a callable (e.g. =
array_map), but I could be forgetting something.
>
> If not, then I think it makes sense to return a callable. It might not be=
 entirely consistent with the behavior of ::class, but, a class isn't entir=
ely consistent with a method/function either, so I think there is some lati=
tude for small differences.
>
> As for the ::func vs ::function. I think ::function is safer, since it's =
a reserved word. Otherwise you might run into issues with something like th=
is:
>
> class foo {
>   const func =3D "bar";
> }
>
> function foo(){}
>
> echo foo::func;
>
> Probably not something that happens very often, but, I think the 4 extra =
characters to prevent it would be worth it.
>
> --
> Chase Peeler
> chasepeeler@gmail.com

Hi, Chase,

Yes, '::function' is better. I don't know because I thought 'func' was
used with short functions.
One case which string can be useful but a callable would not be acceptable =
is:

array_map([I18N::class, translate::function] );

Although it's true that can have side effects.

Thanks, Chase,