Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75177
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 93.190.64.238 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <53B46FA0.1080704@php.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 22:46:24 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <53AEC4F0.8040307@php.net> <53AF0F14.5030703@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <53AF0F14.5030703@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Revisiting Anonymous Classes
From: sebastian@php.net (Sebastian Bergmann)

Am 28.06.2014 20:53, schrieb Rowan Collins:
> Apart from a possibly new use case (although the wiki page does list "it
> would also definitely be very useful for mocking in tests" among the "Use
> Cases from the Community"), how is this proposal different from the one
> which was rejected less than a year ago?

 I probably missed the use case back then :) I like the syntax I
 proposed better (including the limitation regarding extending classes
 and implementing interfaces) which is more similar to that of other
 languages.

> For that matter, has there ever been discussion of a
> "statute on limitations" (time of other conditions for reopening
> discussion) for re-proposing previously rejected features?

 Interesting question (that IMHO should be the topic of a separate
 thread / RFC).