Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:108557
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
In-Reply-To: <5ad01aaf-922e-48b2-0960-8bdf82c557e8@freedom.nl>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 19:31:53 -0500
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <7D6FCE5B-958A-4C54-B0B2-66C4148B1242@newclarity.net>
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>
 <CE981907-0CDD-421F-BC01-1B3F0E95B199@newclarity.net>
 <ebc970d9-8c70-9563-1792-fd8c7ef67f2f@gmail.com>
 <DE2D0FCB-4C39-43F4-B6B6-B5796271EB0E@newclarity.net>
 <10FCCCED-B8AE-4394-91B3-0FEB448E2398@gmail.com>
 <D368D433-A2AE-4C05-9341-A6F0502BF454@newclarity.net>
 <CALKiJKrHKiY0-4=ihES5Uw4OUinAmyNRaiNqQrX-x3Gj74mWDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <2C404984-AD76-4CDF-8E1A-04DF8EF024DD@newclarity.net>
 <5ad01aaf-922e-48b2-0960-8bdf82c557e8@freedom.nl>
To: Dik Takken <d.h.j.takken@freedom.nl>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC]
From: mike@newclarity.net (Mike Schinkel)

> On Feb 13, 2020, at 5:26 PM, Dik Takken <d.h.j.takken@freedom.nl> =
wrote:
>=20
> On 13-02-2020 19:19, Mike Schinkel wrote:
>> function foo{}
>>=20
>> foo::function  =E2=80=94 Returns name of function
>> foo::fn  =E2=80=94 Returns closure for function=20
>>=20
>> Since using `fn` creates anonymous function closures it kinda makes =
sense that `::fn` would return a closure.
>=20
> That is somewhat confusing in my opinion, the two class constants are
> too similar. I would rather prefer:
>=20
>    foo::function  =E2=80=94 Returns name of function
>    foo::closure   =E2=80=94 Returns closure for function
>=20
> Regards,
> Dik Takken

I actually prefer foo::closure over foo::fn though either would be fine =
with me, especially if it means getting the feature vs. not getting the =
feature.

The reason I proposed ::fn was because I trying to suggest something =
that I though Larry Garfield would appreciate given his recent =
comment[1] in response to you where he said:=20

"Analysis: I stand by my earlier statement that ::function is just too =
damned long for this funtionality. Not when already reserved shorter =
options exist.  ::fn"

-Mike
[1] https://externals.io/message/108459#108542=20=