Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:130640
Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 10:10:40 -0500
To: "php internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <e2ef88cf-8b90-4af8-8a39-beca2b94684e@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7991abf6-9cc8-444e-885c-4f8cd6078fa8@gmail.com>
References: <a087d9fa-112a-4631-9c84-3efae641e0db@app.fastmail.com>
 <cf17cf19-f41e-4378-9a82-cb7f1a9d7b70@app.fastmail.com>
 <5d96fca3ca5418e6e9e5d8871b26477f@bastelstu.be>
 <7991abf6-9cc8-444e-885c-4f8cd6078fa8@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Context Managers
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield")

On Tue, Apr 14, 2026, at 3:42 PM, Alex Rock wrote:
> Le 29/03/2026 =C3=A0 13:14, Tim D=C3=BCsterhus a =C3=A9crit :
>> // ...=20
>
>
> I'm sorry that I'm arriving super late in the process, but I've=20
> subscribed to the mailing list only recently.
>
> To give here my 2cents:
>
> I think this RFC addresses something good (scoped code in the middle o=
f=20
> a bigger chunk of code), but does it maybe a bit too bloated-ly.

Hi Alex.

I think you're missing the point of this construct.  What you're describ=
ing is much closer to the recently-declined `let` scoping keyword (https=
://wiki.php.net/rfc/optin_block_scoping).

The entire point of context managers is to abstract away and make reusab=
le the try-catch-finally logic.  That logic needs to live somewhere so t=
hat it can be reused.  That is what the ContextManager object is for.  I=
t's not a complication; it's the entire purpose of the RFC.

Since you just recently joined the list you would have missed the earlie=
r discussion in this thread of closures.  (See https://externals.io/mess=
age/129077).  In short, closures are what people use today for this use =
case, but they're a PITA because they don't support auto-capture (unless=
 you're using the single-line version).  That makes them less common, be=
cause they're a pain to use in this case.  In addition, they do create a=
 new scope, which... is not what we want in this case.  Not creating a n=
ew scope is a feature, not a bug. =20


Also, this email serves as notice that I've updated the RFC again to mak=
e continue an alias of break, as it was originally.

--Larry Garfield