Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75123
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 192.64.116.207 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\))
In-Reply-To: <53AEC4F0.8040307@php.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 14:46:27 +0100
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <50E8E93D-A702-46FF-A653-9C2A23746A06@ajf.me>
References: <53AEC4F0.8040307@php.net>
To: Sebastian Bergmann <sebastian@php.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Revisiting Anonymous Classes
From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds)


On 28 Jun 2014, at 14:36, Sebastian Bergmann <sebastian@php.net> wrote:

>    $o =3D new {
>        public function method() {
>            // ...
>        }
>=20
>        // ...
>    };


I wanted a similar syntax for object literals, but seems you had the =
same idea for anonymous classes.

Which makes me wonder if we need to implement the full features of a =
class. Could we perhaps use a more compact, but limited, syntax for =
properties and methods here? Would these dummies need private and =
protected members?
--
Andrea Faulds
http://ajf.me/