Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115302 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 66157 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2021 13:53:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 5 Jul 2021 13:53:30 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B6FE18053C for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:15:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-lf1-f50.google.com (mail-lf1-f50.google.com [209.85.167.50]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 5 Jul 2021 07:15:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f50.google.com with SMTP id a18so32693412lfs.10 for ; Mon, 05 Jul 2021 07:15:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JbR9NoOouYz77rXAat9hX1VAwOcXrTO7evP+uAYwD8Y=; b=IwIKf0jKOlITk0MydEeM6dB6DdbbmtyUqezYZuClTKagK8RXsKK5zId5qdepIx7U2P eGD+mw5KxEcPT2lR9xMpvvGUz14yb32O4ZtIfoJpnj9dHjxwUKt47BGTRMBrsYbHbOKh LQHX6EVn8ROxmem4w7vEljMdQMhSU1iPfEO1Ar1fI/knxI6O2kQCs+YH03vNIQfAre6l Va0nUf5qPSBqH0EiJUqaaE+oLkfmVnknabR8zLO8FBr2bzqWpOTo3vatjOnnYO6cC6/8 MrlIxwegkZMSok506FWOHyvXblGVFlf+2ZIs8wCTXMrQo0c33qOpOj4IL8bH39UE7X6y n7XQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530xWD9sN6TfaV+HMjdVwz1pzSyqzTuP7XPvb3+D8tsyc9GOG9N0 Oiru9oDDvXZvqwGocfHcudTlCf66bE+zpDL2fI3CrQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyn/qp7SD3qWhss7uten8HuGhdq957Eo54QXsHcQ/Cqy1DmSPS02rfX1/mB1Hci/R7I9/u325YpyEnH8H7VGlk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:34cb:: with SMTP id w11mr6324628lfr.451.1625494497047; Mon, 05 Jul 2021 07:14:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 09:14:46 -0500 Message-ID: To: Nikita Popov Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000014c4f205c660eeb6" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] First-class callable syntax From: pollita@php.net (Sara Golemon) --00000000000014c4f205c660eeb6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 5:51 AM Nikita Popov wrote: > As the partial function application RFC has not been accepted, I have > opened voting on https://wiki.php.net/rfc/first_class_callable_syntax. The > vote closes on 2021-07-16. > > This RFC uses a syntax that is forward-compatible with partial function > application. Should it not be accepted, I'll explore alternative syntax > possibilities. > > Was replying to a comment on reddit which made me look closer at your implementation. It looks like this does NOT allow for use of function-like language constructs. e.g. $e = echo(...); $p = print(...); $r = require(...); // etc... 1/ Is this intentional? 2/ Is this actually a good thing? I'm actually of a mind that it's a good thing, as surprising ways to reach eval() are foot-guns waiting to happen, but wanted to get confirmation. -Sara --00000000000014c4f205c660eeb6--