Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:35765 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 13439 invoked by uid 1010); 24 Feb 2008 10:23:37 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 13424 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2008 10:23:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 24 Feb 2008 10:23:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=andrei@gravitonic.com; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=andrei@gravitonic.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain gravitonic.com from 204.11.219.139 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: andrei@gravitonic.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 204.11.219.139 mail.lerdorf.com Received: from [204.11.219.139] ([204.11.219.139:55498] helo=mail.lerdorf.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E4/B4-30812-7A541C74 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 05:23:36 -0500 Received: from [172.23.152.171] ([81.253.80.53]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.lerdorf.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m1OANNPw024902; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 02:23:24 -0800 In-Reply-To: <698DE66518E7CA45812BD18E807866CE014A9365@us-ex1.zend.net> References: <47B9B1B9.7060601@geminisbs.com> <93D0D6BA-34AD-4A17-B474-91B251628EA5@gravitonic.com> <698DE66518E7CA45812BD18E807866CE014A9365@us-ex1.zend.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-ID: Cc: "Matvey Arye" , "KOYAMA Tetsuji" , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 11:23:22 +0100 To: Andi Gutmans X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/5958/Sun Feb 24 01:17:48 2008 on colo.lerdorf.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Anonymous functions From: andrei@gravitonic.com (Andrei Zmievski) To be clear, my statement was about the closures and not sexier anonymous functions. I agree that we need to do an RFC on this matter. -Andrei On Feb 23, 2008, at 8:36 PM, Andi Gutmans wrote: > I think we have to be very clear whether we are going to provide > just a > sexier notation for anonymous functions or closures (and if the latter > what the semantics are). > Just doing one and not figuring out the long term piece doesn't make > sense because we may end up having two completely distinct features > and/or feature creep over the next year which doesn't make much > sense to > me. > > I think in last discussion most ppl just preferred a sexier anonymous > function esp. as there weren't very clear/clean proposals for how > closures would work in PHP and what the benefits would be. > > So I definitely suggest to have a discussion, maybe RFC based like > Stefan did but really decide once and for all on where we'd like to go > with this. We all know that no features map 1:1 to PHP and there are > always unique behaviors of our language and environment which > require a > fresh view at things. >