Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:69383
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.54 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALtuQzAxh8P7nNAobv9==utJ_Cb729vBzwJQ77R+mOBONh5DOg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <D9.10.12097.032EF325@pb1.pair.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.10.1309230946590.5168@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
	<CAMyk_AaEZRqMwFXKhHyHn4PvxhPdCqwP1Cn8vmnoajW38ZSE5A@mail.gmail.com>
	<slrnl42thm.a07.dsp@dsp.local>
	<CAPMc8uaFVTUwEEWw49AgvOJxK8i-6SFdFq-RxFpbo__TRtZiWA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF9U7z85iJsHppjpjUNZ3TT=Oq17_FHoXzE-Xv8BwczWXjK6cw@mail.gmail.com>
	<5241F11C.5080707@php.net>
	<008301ceb967$b49ab190$1dd014b0$@tutteli.ch>
	<524205D8.8000608@php.net>
	<CAPMc8uYwwd9s2SN4uVWRf7QuFZRxAmoeDpNsSc16funCOe13Vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5242ADAE.2080007@php.net>
	<CAPMc8uaNXj4TC6wDh7OZWhF60QRO-fd1JccyK8CZffcMjrLrKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5242E88D.90407@php.net>
	<CAOWwgp=Lm_-7FTqTk9=yDO+bENRRSgGrZow6FWVb9-S0o9HdWg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5244095F.3090005@php.net>
	<CAOWwgpnMGXy8AkrxhoemWTZwQZj2oeY6ya=4Tv19-OQz4N8XBg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALJZF3jKTUDtVUTnAPGs2h2bd_V++iungV6CHeEnP9SK2eQCdg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALtuQzAxh8P7nNAobv9==utJ_Cb729vBzwJQ77R+mOBONh5DOg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 10:42:25 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPMc8uZcaqnTMq5g9T0fdwPD+wNRT=wZJBXk5x=F=7co+FY9ug@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sebastian Krebs <krebs.seb@gmail.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc0d20d4e9b004e75a4de4
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Anonymous Classes
From: terence.copestake@gmail.com (Terence Copestake)

--047d7bdc0d20d4e9b004e75a4de4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

> Just ... Isn't that something, we can simply keep out of _this_ RFC and
> create separate RFC(s) for it later? Like it was done with "$this in
> Closures"?


Do we want another 5.3/5.4 closures situation? Why not iron it all out to
begin with?

If there's a sound, logical reason not to implement the functionality in
question, that's fine. I don't understand why we keep reiterating "keeping
it simple" as if that is in itself an excuse to, in effect, rush it through
half-baked.

In the RFC, there are use cases citing languages like Java to support this
- a language in which anonymous classes and the methods in which they're
defined, share scope. Can we then say, let's do it because it's useful in
other languages, but let's not offer the functionality that those languages
do? Also, my proposed use case being practical in the real world hangs on
resolving the scope issue, as I struggle to look past the difficulties I'd
have trying to use this in my code when it's unable to interact with the
object instance in which it is being used.

That's all I'll say on that now; it's becoming circular.

If you want to update my use case in the RFC, here's an expanded example of
what I imagine. I've lifted code from the documentation for Sentry* and
below it, written an alternative anonymous class API example.

* I have no affiliation with Sentry / other membership packages are
available.

try
{
    // Find the user using the user id
    $user = Sentry::findUserById(1);
    // Log the user in
    Sentry::login($user, false);
}
catch (Cartalyst\Sentry\Users\LoginRequiredException $e)
{
    echo 'Login field is required.';
}
catch (Cartalyst\Sentry\Users\UserNotActivatedException $e)
{
    echo 'User not activated.';
}
catch (Cartalyst\Sentry\Users\UserNotFoundException $e)
{
    echo 'User not found.';
}
// Following is only needed if throttle is enabled
catch (Cartalyst\Sentry\Throttling\UserSuspendedException $e)
{
    $time = $throttle->getSuspensionTime();
    echo "User is suspended for [$time] minutes.";
}
catch (Cartalyst\Sentry\Throttling\UserBannedException $e)
{
    echo 'User is banned.';
}

becomes:

$user = Sentry::findUserById(
    1,
    (new class implements Cartalyst\Sentry\LoginHandlerInterface
    {
        public function onLoginRequired()
        {
            echo 'Login field is required.';
        }
        public function onUserNotActivated()
        {
            echo 'User not activated.';
        }
        public function onUserNotFound()
        {
            echo 'User not found.';
        }
        // Following is only needed if throttle is enabled
        public function onUserSuspended()
        {
            $time = $throttle->getSuspensionTime();
            echo "User is suspended for [$time] minutes.";
        }
        public function onUserBanned()
        {
            echo 'User is banned.';
        }
        public function onSuccess()
        {
            // Log the user in
            Sentry::login($user, false);
        }
    })
);

--047d7bdc0d20d4e9b004e75a4de4--