Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:43673
Return-Path: <frozenfire@thefrozenfire.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 18467 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2009 08:20:04 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 13 Apr 2009 08:20:04 -0000
X-Host-Fingerprint: 66.183.89.177 unknown  
Received: from [66.183.89.177] ([66.183.89.177:13334] helo=localhost.localdomain)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 2E/A3-31755-3B5F2E94 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Mon, 13 Apr 2009 04:20:04 -0400
Message-ID: <2E.A3.31755.3B5F2E94@pb1.pair.com>
To: internals@lists.php.net
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:20:00 -0700
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20090412025100.GA5493@klutometis.wikitex.org> <8B.71.31755.246E2E94@pb1.pair.com> <C4.22.31755.C01F2E94@pb1.pair.com> <20090413080506.GB10458@klutometis.wikitex.org> <B0.13.31755.023F2E94@pb1.pair.com> <20090413081753.GC10458@klutometis.wikitex.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090413081753.GC10458@klutometis.wikitex.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Posted-By: 66.183.89.177
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Closures and __FUNCTION__
From: frozenfire@thefrozenfire.com (Justin Martin)

I suppose it's an issue of cloning. Perhaps there's some difference
between a cloned closure and a referenced closure?

Thanks,
Justin Martin

Peter Danenberg wrote:
>> First, we define $foo and load it with NULL so that it is available for
>> referencing.
> 
> It turns out loading $foo is superfluous; I can get away with just:
> 
>   $foo = function($foo) use (&$foo) {
>        $foo();
>   }
> 
>> Next, in terms of program logic, we create a closure with a lexical
>> ('use') variable of a reference to $foo, which is then assigned to
>> $foo. Thus, the reference to $foo in the closure declaration now
>> points to the closure itself.
> 
> That much is clear; but why $foo is all of the sudden bound within the
> closure when I use by reference (&$foo) as opposed to use by value
> ($foo) is mysterious.