Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:117671
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <17c9ff9e9da.10b3e7f1c1280030.5141627710284677362@pmmp.io>
 <D8DA00D4-1EC3-4FFF-A2FE-872FDA9DDB6E@gmail.com> <17ca83c277d.dc53327f1579308.2336162242535956459@pmmp.io>
In-Reply-To: <17ca83c277d.dc53327f1579308.2336162242535956459@pmmp.io>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 15:59:37 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOWwgpnyuPfKqEgPBSUQ1ZtQQpgCgNSLZN=vOXSO06k+jwbiUA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dylan K. Taylor" <dktapps@pmmp.io>
Cc: Claude Pache <claude.pache@gmail.com>, internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ba244a05de442782"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Add ReflectionFunctionAbstract::isAnonymous()
From: nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com (Nicolas Grekas)

--000000000000ba244a05de442782
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Le ven. 22 oct. 2021 =C3=A0 15:41, Dylan K. Taylor <dktapps@pmmp.io> a =C3=
=A9crit :

>
> ---- On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 14:19:23 +0100 Claude Pache <
> claude.pache@gmail.com> wrote ----
>
>  >
>  > Le 21 oct. 2021 =C3=A0 01:12, Dylan K. Taylor <dktapps@pmmp.io> a =C3=
=A9crit :
>  >
>  > Hi all,
>  >
>  > Given the addition of Closure::fromCallable() and the upcoming
> first-class callable syntax in 8.1, it seems slightly problematic that
> there's no simple way to tell by reflection if a Closure refers to an
> anonymous function or not. ReflectionFunctionAbstract::isClosure() (perha=
ps
> somewhat misleadingly) returns whether the closure is literally a \Closur=
e
> instance, so it's not useful for this purpose.
>  >
>  > The only way to do this currently (that I know about) is to check if
> the name of the function contains "{closure}", which is a bit unpleasant
> and depends on undocumented behaviour.
>  >
>  > I'm proposing the addition of
> ReflectionFunctionAbstract::isAnonymous(), which would fill this use case=
,
> and may be able to offer an implementation.
>  >
>  > Thanks,
>  > Dylan Taylor.
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>  > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  > Per the manual [1], Closure::fromCallable() =E2=80=9Ccreates and retur=
ns a new
> anonymous function=E2=80=9D. I guess that this might not match your notio=
n of
> =E2=80=9Canonymous function=E2=80=9D?
>  >
>  > Therefore, I am asking for clarification: What practical distinction d=
o
> you make between =E2=80=9Dan instance of Closure=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Can=
 anonymous function=E2=80=9D, and
> why does this distinction matter?
>  >
>  > [1]: https://www.php.net/manual/en/closure.fromcallable.php
>  >
>  > =E2=80=94Claude
>  >
>
> Hi Claude,
> Sorry for the double email, my previous reply got bounced from the mailin=
g
> list because I replied from the wrong address.
>
> An anonymous function would be an unnamed function, e.g. arrow function o=
r
> function(){}.
>
> I guess the documentation for Closure::fromCallable() ought to be updated=
,
> because Closure::fromCallable('namedFunc') isn't really anonymous, it's a
> \Closure object that refers to a named function. A \Closure may refer to =
a
> named or an anonymous function, and currently there's no way to tell the
> difference without hacks.
>
> The distinction is important for reflection cases, such as the one Aaron
> mentioned, and also like generating a pretty name for closures in a proje=
ct
> I maintain [1].
>
> It's a fringe use case for sure, but considering we already have
> ReflectionClass->isAnonymous(), I think it makes sense.
>
> [1]:
> https://github.com/pmmp/PocketMine-MP/blob/986b4e0651d665c72ec011542f95b4=
bd9529c6a8/src/pocketmine/utils/Utils.php#L144
>
>
>

For the record, I submitted a PR adding ReflectionFunction::isAnonymous()
at
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/8499

Cheers,
Nicolas

--000000000000ba244a05de442782--