Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65955
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.182 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPwsocECUoCp_joTsazyDK61tabPZ=yx+ffiYbigtyS3FH9zZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAESVnVo1z2RA=87GjJa9onW-i91wW_fQ=unED=bDK=LmrKwJ=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADq_CxqBXzcippi6RynuZDH0b5Fjgc5WN9i6+46KZPPSpV-JRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <8490FC41-2696-4948-83A1-3931674183B0@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1302191317590.5054@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <3EBB0AF2-A114-4652-806B-C50DD8F9557D@inviqa.com> <CAPwsocECUoCp_joTsazyDK61tabPZ=yx+ffiYbigtyS3FH9zZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:44:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL0xaBEciyrn8eRQDfg-vtWsArinAtEqWgKodmDCo_db7vODXg@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b86e2f8b7dcf404d614e20b
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Short syntax for anonymous functions
From: arvids.godjuks@gmail.com (Arvids Godjuks)

--047d7b86e2f8b7dcf404d614e20b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I also don't like the RFC proposed syntax. I have to say that I don't
really like those short magic-like syntax things in in other languages too.
If you work with them on the day-to-day basis and tools are built around
those concepts - it's one thing. In PHP syntax is mostly self-explanatory
and for the most part there is only one way to do it (or the differences in
syntax have their own uses - like for () {} is used in code and  for ():
endfor; is good for templates).

I like the current $x = function () {}. It's the same in JavaScript (and
because most of us use jQuery - we use it a lot) and realistically I don't
type it - IDE does auto-complete for me.

P.S. I want to tell all those syntax enhancement guys - don't push
syntax-sugar stuff into PHP for the sake of shorter syntax. First, for the
most part it looks alien in PHP. Second - it really depends on the
preception - I for example hate Ruby syntax, it's crap and unreadable -
this just illustrated that's one mans beauty is other mans ugly. PHP syntax
maybe not the most pretty out there, but it is sure as hell easy to read
even if coder makes a mess of it. I saw the opinion on the internet that
PHP is a scripted version of C in the sense of their positioning and usage.
And I totally agree with it, and I want it to stay that way. PHP should not
be the pretty one, or be on the feature edge. PHP needs to just walk with
time and adopt the good stuff fully integrating into itself, not just
patching the core and adding some half-weird syntax that just doesn't
really fit PHP.
You also have to remember that PHP is a WEB development script language,
not general purpose script language like Ruby or Python. Not all features,
that are good in general purpose languages, are good for WEB language. Some
of those features may bring performance hits that are not worth it.

My 0.02$,
Arvids.

--047d7b86e2f8b7dcf404d614e20b--