Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114503
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <f3d20496-c560-42b7-9a0d-8672b3cafa7d@www.fastmail.com>
 <1565EB81-57B7-49B0-A47C-342E0088A432@trowski.com> <CAN2symhHys1uADWnOfraEA3SiM8_57=JttWhgOJ0Kh7nwt4R+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEMvS4FbtPqdeySsVWm=Gub1BNiv+OCiB2oGL-+aZvBH7hmisA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEMvS4F+AbxPJQ5ctLONptECvmkdrzT42oU4rDOjtD2dC_jEJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <09B663C3-E21D-432B-BB7F-78312F827C30@newclarity.net> <CAC5V6gjDfqxBPYF_ejVTboPOGV9rg0ArAqOGGO3mPG6nqEPevw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5B96C4C4-A324-4EF8-8196-83480E897884@newclarity.net>
In-Reply-To: <5B96C4C4-A324-4EF8-8196-83480E897884@newclarity.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 17:34:36 +0200
Message-ID: <CAC5V6ghPnYmNsbK7vCnAO7rfCee7fvsChCigfM0EYUtXk1Fv=Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net>
Cc: php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006aaf1c05c2885567"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Partial function application
From: guilliam.xavier@gmail.com (Guilliam Xavier)

--0000000000006aaf1c05c2885567
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 5:16 PM Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net> wrote:

>
>
> On May 17, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Guilliam Xavier <guilliam.xavier@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:58 AM Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > Well, I was thinking that by changing the proposed syntax we could
>> achieve
>> > what is proposed and a little bit more.
>> > Also we wouldn't need to worry about the number of ? needed as
>> arguments.
>> > Since all we need is to mark the return type as partial (closure) on the
>> > fly and grab hold of what is passed as arguments.
>> >
>> > There are some different syntaxes that come to my mind:
>> > We could still use ? but outside of the arguments list?
>> > ```
>> > $partial = xyx?(..);
>> > $partial = ?xyx(..);
>> > ```
>> > or maybe different symbols:
>> > ```
>> > $partial = :xyz(..);
>> > ```
>> >
>> > We might be able to even cast the return type:
>> > ```
>> > $partial = (?) xyz(..);
>> > $partial = (partial) xyz(..);
>> > $partial = (fn) xyz(..);
>> > ```
>>
>> Casting is another interesting approach that does feel more consistent
>> with the existing language.
>>
>> Since it *is* creating a closure, wouldn't this make the most sense?
>>
>> $partial = (closure) abc();
>>
>
> Ouch! definitely NOT!
>
>
>> $partial = (closure) xyz(?,24);
>
>
>
> Mind if I ask for you to elaborate on your aversion?
>
> Asking for general understanding, not to debate the point.
>
> -Mike
>

Sorry I was too "raw".  I mean that the cast syntax `$p = (whatever) f();`
already very clearly means/does "evaluate f() [i.e. call it], then convert
the evaluation result to whatever, then assign the conversion result to
$p", and I think it would be a **very bad idea** to "reuse" the same syntax
for something that wouldn't call f() immediately.

I'm favorable to other syntaxes, but which don't look like a cast.

Regards,

-- 
Guilliam Xavier

--0000000000006aaf1c05c2885567--