Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:74118
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <536D3C30.9010801@sugarcrm.com>
References: <CAFMT4NqysLiRJH5vye2qbbwwPuAce4e+dRXqkVN2UnwzOw=qvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<536D3C30.9010801@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 21:12:05 -0600
Message-ID: <CAFMT4NqMXO4-d6LuN1r2ptfwp3R=CSywPQrVA303JZ7dD=TBKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0118324007064504f91732b0
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Anonymous functions inside static methods.
From: morrison.levi@gmail.com (Levi Morrison)

--089e0118324007064504f91732b0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

There was a reply to this list from Sanford Whiteman which I never
received: http://marc.info/?l=php-internals&m=139959267615452&w=2

Contents posted below:

> I think Bar::bar() should definitely return 'Bar' (currently returns
> 'Foo') but what about the Bar::Baz() call?

I kinda agree, but that ship has sailed and it would be a BC break.

You can do $foo->bindTo(null,Bar) even if the closure is static.

Actually, it seems that when you call the parent function statically,
the child closure is considered static no matter what else you do. So
even force-running a parent function statically at runtime
(disregarding the warning) means it and its child closures
will behave as if they had the `static` keyword.

I note in your 3v4l that HHVM does not follow the same rules.

-- S.

--089e0118324007064504f91732b0--