Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:129333
Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2025 08:46:18 -0600
To: "php internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <8defc59c-7c33-40e6-83d2-6f01cd8fae46@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP1Jc1215HK6CyzOPgZEYUpsxCjuLYMHbnh5_Fe-CNfiO+gRCA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAPyeZ4PvBx6Q22dDGBXxufNu8-SjKLGxiTMPFSLb9COMgbVjAA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP1Jc1215HK6CyzOPgZEYUpsxCjuLYMHbnh5_Fe-CNfiO+gRCA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] First-class constructor callables
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield")

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025, at 8:21 AM, Arnaud Le Blanc wrote:
> Hi Valentin,
>
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 2:20=E2=80=AFPM Valentin Udaltsov
> <udaltsov.valentin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Question for Larry and Arnaud:
>>
>> In PFA v2, you note that constructor references pose significant tech=
nical challenges.
>> Could you elaborate on what those challenges are and whether they are=
 fundamental, or potentially addressable with a more limited or explicit=
 syntax such as `new Foo(...)`?
>
> One issue is that partial application needs to resolve the function
> being applied, but constructors can not be resolved without
> instantiating the class first (at least, not on all classes). So `new
> Foo(...)` would need to instantiate Foo, resolve the constructor, and
> discard the instance, before creating the PFA.
>
> This is something that could be addressed as a follow up to PFA v2.
>
> Best Regards,
> Arnaud

I will defer to Arnaud on the details.  For my part, I have no conceptua=
l objection to partialing constructors.  The reason it was omitted from =
PFAv2 was basically "it's hard and complicated and there's enough going =
on here as is."

If someone else wants to do a follow up RFC for FCC/PFA on constructors,=
 I would not be opposed.

--Larry Garfield