Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:69311
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 07:23:29 -0400
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <D9.10.12097.032EF325@pb1.pair.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1309230946590.5168@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
 <CAMyk_AaEZRqMwFXKhHyHn4PvxhPdCqwP1Cn8vmnoajW38ZSE5A@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-18 (Linux)
Message-ID: <slrnl42thm.a07.dsp@dsp.local>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Anonymous Classes
From: dsp@php.net (David Soria Parra)

Lazare Inepologlou <linepogl@gmail.com> schrieb:
> I use anonymous classes very frequently in Java and in C#, and I would say
> that they are quite useful. However the examples given in the RFC are
> really bad ones. Why on earth would you need a constructor for an anonymous
> class? Anonymous classes are used to implement quickly some interface.
> Frankly, constructors are not part of any interface. Besides a constructor
> is totally useless in an anonymous class as it will never be called after
> the object is created.

The need for anonymous classes in Java mostly comes from implementing
interfaces on demand due to the lack of lamdas and the requirements of
a strongly typed language. PHP has lambdas and it doesn't require you
to match typing. Therefore I think the preferred way for most of the
use cases is to use a lambda or if a bigger implementation is necessary,
to give it a name. Due to namespacing you don't pollute the global scope
anyway. Therefore I don't see much reason left as to why add anonymous
classes and I really have a hard time finding a use case, except for trying
to write PHP as you would write Java (which most likely is a bad idea).

- David