Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:38450
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 85.214.94.56 as permitted sender)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:42:05 +0200
Reply-To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
Message-ID: <518079982.20080620104205@marcus-boerger.de>
To: Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com>
CC: Christian Seiler <chris_se@gmx.net>, Lars Strojny <lars@strojny.net>, 
	Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>, 
	Johannes Schlueter <johannes@schlueters.de>, 
	php-dev List <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <485922F9.7070806@zend.com>
References: <4856A547.3080801@gmx.net>  <1961603263.20080617120320@marcus-boerger.de> <4857ACE1.3050501@gmx.net>  <1178748433.20080617211038@marcus-boerger.de>  <48580E5C.9090100@zend.com> <1213732325.21878.9.camel@localhost> <485821D6.7020604@gmx.net> <485922F9.7070806@zend.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [PATCH] [RFC] Closures and lambda functions in PHP
From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger)

Hello Stanislav,

Wednesday, June 18, 2008, 5:00:09 PM, you wrote:

> Hi!
>> First: My patch is quite non-intrusive, it only adds things in a few
>> places (new opcode, a few checks). If you only look at the non-generated

> I think it falls into "famous last words" category. While I did not have 
> time yet to look into the patch in the detail, I have hard time to

You have time to answer every little mail. It would only be fair if you
showed respect by at least looking into patches that people provide
because they tried to address long outstanding issues and even address
every little comment we all including you made in the past. Given the wiki
he even clearly showed that he understands what he is doing and that he
did care about a hell of detail.

> believe patch creating wholly new concept in PHP, new opcodes, etc. 
> would have zero impact. You have to consider at least the following: 
> tests, documentation, how lexical interacts with other references 
> (global? static? just variable passed by-ref?), how closure interacts 
> with various reflection capabilities, how it works with bytecode caches, 
> what happens with lifetimes of the variables saved in closures - 
> especially implicit ones like $this, etc., etc. I know these questions 
> can be answered, and maybe even easily answered, but I think they have 
> to be answered without pressure of 5.3 release and commitment to the 
> fixed API hanging over us.

> I understand your urge to have it inside ASAP - if you didn't want it, 
> you'd not gone through this effort to create it :) However, I still 
> think we better not make 5.3 dependent on yet another new feature.
> As for adoption - I think it would take a long time for off-the-shelf 
> libraries and mainstream users to use this anyway, and for the hackers 
> among us it will be available in development version pretty soon after 
> 5.3. I think if we would decide that every new feature anybody can think 
> about should enter into 5.3 because it will be harder to adopt it 
> otherwise, we'd never release 5.3 at all - look at the RFCs, we have a 
> bunch of ideas already, and I'm sure there will be more. We need to 
> release some time - what happened to that "release often" thing?

> Please do not consider this to be opinion about (or against) the patch - 
> I think the idea is good and from preliminary glance the implementation 
> is very nice too, but IMHO we just can not have everything in one release.
> -- 
> Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
> stas@zend.com   http://www.zend.com/
> (408)253-8829   MSN: stas@zend.com




Best regards,
 Marcus