Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:34228
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.198.191 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=ct3vvbQrGhZ1RuwWhmSQM/GYy33j+QGoEPMrtetPC3jbdZILKE+q7iMMNHV/imJ7BW1K0NxcZCVPwzgRVnJ11F1MDAKfr3uO8z/FmLBzFwHbOSmRAsffZWtbH7w8G9elIvsPZj1djnWXma8X1c4iqlGIlDih5FiiMXu8CdX6naQ=
Message-ID: <98b8086f0712221824n320ce3btca61b2d3328c4477@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 03:24:22 +0100
To: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <476DB8AD.3060608@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <98b8086f0712150818n40056cedyf0aae7a5a08a27b7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <476582E6.7020808@zend.com>
	 <D1011E25-76DB-4936-AF3B-F98F19DC2139@procata.com>
	 <200712172130.08216.larry@garfieldtech.com>
	 <4FADC266-873E-4FD2-BEC8-28EA9D833297@procata.com>
	 <476D2854.5070803@gmx.net>
	 <503D0384-1014-4CD1-BCAC-8F0950D5FC68@bitxtender.com>
	 <476DB8AD.3060608@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PATCH: Implementing closures in PHP
From: troelskn@gmail.com ("troels knak-nielsen")

On Dec 23, 2007 2:23 AM, Christian Seiler <chris_se@gmx.net> wrote:
> First of all: I don't quite understand what you mean when you want to
> serialize a function (closure or not)? The opcodes? Ok, sure, with the
> current PHP implementation you can serialize the variable used to CALL
> the function (e.g. with $func = 'str_replace'; $func is only a string

Admittedly, I got the idea, in relation to Wez' patch. There, it would
be trivial to serialize/unserialize the function pointer. I suppose
that isn't immediately possible, if the closure is a resource type.

> and can be serialized). But where would you need that? (Ok, for normal
> functions that are named this could actually be useful, but for
> anonymous functions?)

If a closure could be serialized, it would allow for continuation
style applications. I'm not sure, how good idea this is in web
applications anyway, so just ignore that.

Just a minor note; The semi-colon after the closing brace, seems
superfluous. Is there any reason for it?

Otherwise excellent work there.

-- 
troels