Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:120129
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <6b5de716-d769-4f0b-b3e6-5a5a211f035a@app.fastmail.com> <CAOWwgpn8hZgo2uXLvDK0grM0oBEWMXNFuwD5PNyYxicG4Qs6fw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOWwgpn8hZgo2uXLvDK0grM0oBEWMXNFuwD5PNyYxicG4Qs6fw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2023 20:20:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CABdc3WrjXM4wQ_oxSqspb=6-w7_oc82Hj762HV3etLu-vGfvFQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com>
Cc: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>, php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d830f705fa2d2eb0"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [Discussion] Callable types via Interfaces
From: michal.brzuchalski@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Marcin_Brzuchalski?=)

--000000000000d830f705fa2d2eb0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Nicolas,

wt., 25 kwi 2023, 19:00 u=C5=BCytkownik Nicolas Grekas <
nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com> napisa=C5=82:

> Hi all,
>
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/allow_casting_closures_into_single-method_interf=
ace_implementations
> >
> >
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/allow-closures-to-declare-interfaces-they-implem=
ent
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/structural-typing-for-closures
>
>
> Thanks Larry for the nice introduction to those ideas.
>
> Personally, I feel like going with adding Closure::castTo() might provide
> the most immediate benefit. I expanded the rationale on the corresponding
> RFC and added more examples. I'd appreciate it if all of you reading coul=
d
> have another look to see if that helps to better understand the proposal.
>
> strtr(...)->castTo(TranslatableInterface::class) is one example of RFC #1
> function ($message, $parameters) implements TranslatableInterface is RFC =
#2
>
> Both RFCs nicely combine together to cover many cases of typed callabled.
>
> Then RFC#3 is a bit more adventurous (according to our understanding) but
> still desirable as it's essentially about allowing the engine to
> tentatively call castTo() from RFC#1 when a closure is passed as argument
> while an interface is expected.
>

Personally I don't like this way of shaping callable types. Given examples
are really confusing me. Call of a castTo() with argument representing an
interface with a method is confusing as the method magically appears on a
closure without explicit binding to it! What if an interface has more than
one method? What if I wanna choose which one?

For me personally this goes into wrong direction.

Cheers,
Micha=C5=82 Marcin Brzuchalski

>

--000000000000d830f705fa2d2eb0--