Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76329
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.182 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: "Andrea Faulds" <ajf@ajf.me>, internals@lists.php.net
References: <D17EB1B8-7A7E-419B-AF55-0ADCAB4CFEB3@ajf.me>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 09:48:08 +0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
Message-ID: <op.xj1zqic4c9evq2@nikita-optiplex-9020>
In-Reply-To: <D17EB1B8-7A7E-419B-AF55-0ADCAB4CFEB3@ajf.me>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Closure::call and Function Referencing as
 Closures
From: inefedor@gmail.com ("Nikita Nefedov")

Hey Andrea,

I really love function referencing RFC, this is something I miss in PHP =
 =

and would I have a voting right I'd would +1 even in this state of it.
But I dislike a bit the fact that we start to use Closure for everything=
,  =

I really wish we had a dedicated type for functions (read functions as a=
  =

first-class citizens).


On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 01:50:55 +0400, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:

> Good evening,
>
> I am proposing two new RFCs. As they are both inter-related and  =

> complementary, with the second having the first as a prerequisite, I=E2=
=80=99m  =

> making just a single email to cover both:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closure_apply
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/function_referencing
>
> Both have written, tested and working patches aimed for master.
>
> Thoughts appreciated, thanks.
> --
> Andrea Faulds
> http://ajf.me/
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php