Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118139 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 96652 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2022 14:05:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 30 Jun 2022 14:05:28 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3898B180538 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 08:57:00 -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=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-wr1-f44.google.com (mail-wr1-f44.google.com [209.85.221.44]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 08:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-f44.google.com with SMTP id s1so27959209wra.9 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 08:56:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zP+kqpuwhzsBXklimlr8WTKmk1VOfYO7raG4BSt8EWA=; b=qR8L6M1FvsLTNlirPi9+7OlcOJuwU3Lqo0ju3BfvhJm4pVuQKrNnfIfHqRDDeW9Ssx HbXGaHKpShUjU+je6URJBTwxJI2Xid+I2pipLWFf5eSc+40EkGcBRww+GQal9UpHVaiJ 2q5Y5zmBZ1g+NjeVmohjS9ZnTs8ZjdcDTP7ySko3RwZT+FupTSWI0m9GYlCK7257R2Tj NkgEbMOOgeMRuJPNiMD4bZMpNLeIiXcFEPShR8IHCX4uKzmW6p9pRgyYkBviX1J8uEK2 n/fYqxTwhK4H+gAgr45pER/O2FagxkAd3pz6UJX6IHArsx6IhNcchOwK8ub+4/b21UvZ eEsw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zP+kqpuwhzsBXklimlr8WTKmk1VOfYO7raG4BSt8EWA=; b=kDuNWko/UsY57Je5fOz27Akj3hpZsqy5LlRq/1rrIbpgLxD+LWETOCp0JFIieoFBp8 TCZjDajWzTY6nXVOhOL6jDSGyYX61Xgd7EVNbYVz1cbgGDhXnVdfCQ9JUi10QQS0dAac V+b0+3swfmP2VbTpHq6VnuGr2DNm9mlmdZmhbDQkHL03RO2erEZX8T1VQSybAVZUym8l nXRHAr+bSYqd0V05Rn+fp/ZLFiD+2hEqaNpRr8j1Zc+DaX3/AaJrk4PA/abanp5480Pb xuV0vvcl61ezpGdGJH93CCyGoqO3/OsEF+AtBcm633C5d7nOTcnFbDsMAJ8o6Wu61v82 /C5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora835ZanDXQhFw9FzTDLzXvdAdTDkCBqO5yHo02OqWw5gHMYv0ST pBn2ZHFTu3zH5YU/KBYxEro= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tApbwxlgrqpr1tWaB/creBBgKBB/YKBfd+fvbi6J9sZd47CV9QC8hiV2PYD0K6Ic6hOoTFEQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:64c4:0:b0:21b:a3a2:d64e with SMTP id f4-20020a5d64c4000000b0021ba3a2d64emr9523355wri.571.1656604618450; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 08:56:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arnaud-t490.localnet (2a01cb04054b5b009c33dfa7936925c8.ipv6.abo.wanadoo.fr. [2a01:cb04:54b:5b00:9c33:dfa7:9369:25c8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k42-20020a05600c1caa00b003a04722d745sm3298635wms.23.2022.06.30.08.56.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 30 Jun 2022 08:56:57 -0700 (PDT) To: Dan Ackroyd , internals@lists.php.net Cc: Rowan Tommins , internals , Robert Landers Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 17:56:57 +0200 Message-ID: <7513519.rnE6jSC6OK@arnaud-t490> In-Reply-To: References: <2b35605f-8da8-46b1-aec3-00bd1bfe47fd@www.fastmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Short Closures 2, aka auto-capture take 3 From: arnaud.lb@gmail.com (Arnaud Le Blanc) Hi, On jeudi 30 juin 2022 16:18:44 CEST Robert Landers wrote: > Are > optimizations going to be applied to single-line arrow functions (I > didn't see that in the RFC, but I admittedly didn't look that hard and > I vaguely remember reading something about it in one of these > threads)? If so, it will probably change some behaviors in existing > applications if they were relying on it. Perhaps static analysis tools > can detect this and inform the developer. It is not planned to change the behavior of arrow functions in this RFC. This optimization is less important for arrow functions because they don't usually assign variables. This could be a follow up RFC though.