Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:108496
To: internals@lists.php.net, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>,
 Dan Ackroyd <Danack@basereality.com>
References: <CAD5P3=JwFK03L-DWJYaa0dbBj1chbef_=K-vyawLNeoAz7dHjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALSrLtYm+TSEwo+05JC6LXrQsfzb32pQ24Y7gDUmm-7+NwYi8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOWwgpm43=hoCvsskq2qyhB3yVxntLAYC8hQjQwd9dnvQ=GKkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+kxMuQgdS+N90PsPXPrzgOaebVS1OJUinJ=T+61PaMXcO+-GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Autocrypt: addr=d.h.j.takken@freedom.nl; keydata=
 xjMEXimHTRYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAzvRUI24yOGvteVk9N6VKIt425fNgg0P1rvD2WQLGP+fN
 JERpayBUYWtrZW4gPGQuaC5qLnRha2tlbkBmcmVlZG9tLm5sPsKtBBMWCAA+FiEEvtrj9qG2
 TA2YmjvLhef0X6cSlpAFAl4ph00CGwMFCQlmAYAFCwkIBwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AA
 IQkQhef0X6cSlpAWIQS+2uP2obZMDZiaO8uF5/RfpxKWkPywAQChh9Z1jSvitkT3sIipwMlk
 dnUlYY5Ue3lHBBhF6pQUOwD/XtEz/fsjvqE/GpjJhXpxNodwKjLhaUiFe9qRwwH/5QXOOARe
 KYdNEgorBgEEAZdVAQUBAQdAMNSCUI0PnOjjrFKZDAFRQzKLVDCINuFNgsXh0snmlUwDAQgH
 wpUEGBYIACYWIQS+2uP2obZMDZiaO8uF5/RfpxKWkAUCXimHTQIbDAUJCWYBgAAhCRCF5/Rf
 pxKWkBYhBL7a4/ahtkwNmJo7y4Xn9F+nEpaQEYUA/2mZ3uEN0JTRUZbxHGBMB4IhQw0cdIML
 FpFrTycqUCXCAQD5rWXomBWVD/DRHk7O3KjNsek9F1DEZgGeZ5pPmNF/Dg==
Message-ID: <f1a5537b-9b76-3852-83d0-c7189c750d11@freedom.nl>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 20:08:28 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+kxMuQgdS+N90PsPXPrzgOaebVS1OJUinJ=T+61PaMXcO+-GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC]
From: d.h.j.takken@freedom.nl (Dik Takken)

On 11-02-2020 17:48, Dan Ackroyd wrote:
> I didn't include the following in that RFC, because I thought it would
> be too controversial, but I think it's worth considering a new syntax
> for this.
> 
> Given the code:
> 
> function foo();
> class Zoq {
>     public function Fot() {}
>     public static function Pik() {}
> }
> $obj = new Zoq();
> 
> 
> Then these:
> 
> $(foo);
> $($obj, Fot);
> $(Zoq, Fot);
> 
> Would be equivalent to:
> 
> Closure::fromCallable('foo');
> Closure::fromCallable([$obj, 'Fot']);
> Closure::fromCallable('Zoq::Fot'); or Closure::fromCallable(['Zoq', 'Fot']);
> 
> Or similar.

Given the fact that $() would only accept functions and methods as
argument, this idea could be taken one step further by writing:

    $(foo);
    $($obj->Fot);
    $(Zoq::Fot);

Referring to a method like this is normally not possible because it is
ambiguous. However, wrapped inside $(), which only accepts functions and
methods, the ambiguity disappears.

The $() syntax is nice and short. And something completely new. As new
syntax can only be 'spent' once, more familiar alternatives should be
explored as well. Thinking about the existing list() and array() syntax,
another possibility could be:

    closure(foo);
    closure($obj->Fot);
    closure(Zoq::Fot);

It is slightly longer but more familiar syntax.

On 11-02-2020 19:46, Larry Garfield wrote:
>
> I would love a nicer way to reference function names; it's really ugly
to do functional code in PHP otherwise, or even just dynamic function
logic within a namespace.  If I never have to write $fn = __NAMESPACE__
. '\a_func' again, it will be too soon. :-)

Perhaps Larry can convince us all to go for something like $() by
posting a fabulous functional programming example?

Regards,
Dik Takken