Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:39669
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: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 21:32:57 +0200
Reply-To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
Message-ID: <1665638762.20080805213257@marcus-boerger.de>
To: Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>
CC: Moriyoshi Koizumi <moriyoshi@at.wakwak.com>, internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <48983960.3020003@zend.com>
References: <909776579.20080803142659@marcus-boerger.de> <4896A7C4.8090503@zend.com> <4110083360.20080804104233@marcus-boerger.de> <4896EA3C.6010203@zend.com> <4897E9B5.9020006@at.wakwak.com> <4897F54F.7080909@zend.com> <96829337.20080805132125@marcus-boerger.de> <48983960.3020003@zend.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Inconsistencies in 5.3
From: helly@php.net (Marcus Boerger)

Hello Dmitry,

Tuesday, August 5, 2008, 1:28:32 PM, you wrote:

> Of course not, but it will be very hard to understand difference and 
> fix parser conflicts.

How is that hard? we have top_statement and inner_statement in our
parser...problem solved.

Ha, i actually just learned this way that we support inner functions, tsk.

marcus

> Thanks. Dmitry.

> Marcus Boerger wrote:
>> Hello Dmitry,
>> 
>> Tuesday, August 5, 2008, 8:38:07 AM, you wrote:
>> 
>>> Allowing "use" inside function body assuming allowing it everywhere.
>> 
>>> $x = function($arg) {
>>>                 if ($arg) {
>>>                         use $a;
>>>                 } else {
>>>                         use $b;
>>>                 }
>>>         };
>> 
>>> I don't like such ability and of course we won't be able to use "use" 
>>> keyword as it will conflict with import statement.
>> 
>> So the import statement use can be placed inside the body of a function as
>> an expression?
>> 
>> 
>>> Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote:
>>>> Dmitry Stogov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>> I don't think there are many differences in ambiguity between
>>>>
>>>> $closure = function ($arg) { use $a;
>>>>   ...
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>> $closure = function ($arg) use ($a) {
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> Moriyoshi
>>>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best regards,
>>  Marcus
>> 




Best regards,
 Marcus