Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:112264
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+kxMuRjJ5B_ykNXeMZhAd6iduh-VEk7CNP0vNuZp9fjka5_HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAKU0u=cHBO1r=vA9_KdXzrPGzQuiCksPTPYZZB5d0mSfrDxfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJmy8YF2Un=Di_xOL=dnQ8nhOHO4ZbyptXz4PRLnYY=zZDzK1A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+kxMuTm+UorKQ=YU96c_k6H-c3CVhmA7gu12K-6Sf532Qrpag@mail.gmail.com>
 <55e200cf-ed16-e935-4e09-728ce3362cba@gmx.de> <CAEsg9X2w=Bty-4oVsN1ac6+J6PFko7XAajGfk4os7cruQS8Yxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAESVnVp42zB6paMoBfKAfDF8kdH3_3-8KZkvk=AzPESmH57C9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEsg9X3zx9sAdap3JTkua6g3jki8QcsHVixYfH_+9xwNg4wA1Q@mail.gmail.com> <2369a5a3-3309-4131-81c1-4ebded96e61f@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2369a5a3-3309-4131-81c1-4ebded96e61f@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 11:47:25 -0600
Message-ID: <CAESVnVqDQALuOJG_h6wMg6q1TpxTVqZEgkDkS9GitEeL_h70xQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
Cc: php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009a7e4305b48d70d7"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Draft - Closure self reference
From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon)

--0000000000009a7e4305b48d70d7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:40 AM Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
wrote:

> > (5) function $lambda(... $args): returnType use ($captures...) {}
> >
> > To be honest, as I typed what came to mind, I ended up preferring this
> last
> > option.
>
> I kind of like that option, too.


Agreed that this has some attractiveness to it.

What does returning by reference look like in that world though?

$fn = function &$lambda($args...) {...};

Capturing lambda by reference doesn't make sense when you've just declared
the var, but it looks confusing AF.

$fn = function $lambda&($args...) {...};

Hello PERL...


>   The main question in my mind is whether that means the same variable is
> used internally and externally or not.
>

The prototype I wrote in my brain for this would have $lambda exclusively
within the closure's scope, not leaked to the declaring scope.  I think I
prefer that even though it looks a bit odd to have a name on a function
that's not accessible from where it's defined.

TL;DR - Still a little confusing.

-Sara

--0000000000009a7e4305b48d70d7--