Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:39627 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 35231 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2008 11:38:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 4 Aug 2008 11:38:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=dmitry@zend.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=dmitry@zend.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 212.25.124.163 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: dmitry@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.25.124.163 il-gw1.zend.com Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP1 Received: from [212.25.124.163] ([212.25.124.163:55277] helo=il-gw1.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id A2/61-28228-E4AE6984 for ; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 07:38:55 -0400 Received: from [10.1.10.13] ([10.1.10.13]) by il-gw1.zend.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 4 Aug 2008 14:39:36 +0300 Message-ID: <4896EA3C.6010203@zend.com> Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:38:36 +0400 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcus Boerger CC: internals@lists.php.net References: <909776579.20080803142659@marcus-boerger.de> <4896A7C4.8090503@zend.com> <4110083360.20080804104233@marcus-boerger.de> In-Reply-To: <4110083360.20080804104233@marcus-boerger.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Aug 2008 11:39:36.0809 (UTC) FILETIME=[C5D17D90:01C8F626] Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Inconsistencies in 5.3 From: dmitry@zend.com (Dmitry Stogov) Marcus Boerger wrote: > Hello Dmitry, > > Monday, August 4, 2008, 8:55:00 AM, you wrote: > >> Hi Marcus, > >> see below > >> Marcus Boerger wrote: >>> Hello Internals, >>> >>> please let's not introduce new inconsistencies. Rather lets make new >>> stuff consistent with old stuff during the alpha phase of 5.3. >>> >>> 1) new keyword 'use'. Semantically it is the same as 'static' or 'global' >>> so it should be used in the same location. > >> For me 'use' is the best keyword as it says that closure uses variables >> from current content. (the same keyword is used for import from namespaces) > > To be clear, I wasn't complaining about the keyword per se. I just prefer > it to be inside the curly braces of a closure next to global rather than in > front of it. > No. The list of lexical variables is a part of the closure definition. The earlier implementation had "lexical" keyword which worked as you are suggesting, but it was much unclear. Thanks. Dmitry.