Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81047
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.177 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <54C28B63.1040506@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 17:56:51 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <54BEC072.5000507@mabe.berlin> <CAF+90c97pHH7+qnxV61RjTRv3-vOzHn9oGva3wHVGgbMEE=aSw@mail.gmail.com> <AAD87184-07B2-4E93-B872-1F2587CA9260@ajf.me>
In-Reply-To: <AAD87184-07B2-4E93-B872-1F2587CA9260@ajf.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Inconsistencies in callable, call_user_func and direct
 variable calls
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

Andrea Faulds wrote on 23/01/2015 14:37:
> Hey Nikita,
>
>> On 20 Jan 2015, at 21:46, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Marc Bennewitz <dev@mabe.berlin> wrote:
>>
>>> valid for call_user_func[_array] and callable type-hint but invalid for
>>> for direct variable calls:
>>> - string "MyClass::staticFunc"
>>> - string "self::staticFunc"
>>> - string "static::staticFunc"
>>> - string "parent::func"
>>> - string "parent::staticFunc"
>>>
>>> see http://3v4l.org/1oSO3
>>>
>>> Thoughts ?
>>>
>> I would prefer deprecating this alternative notation instead of adding more
>> support for it. The [$class, $method] form is the canonical form we support
>> everywhere and which is consistent with the [$obj, $method] callbacks.
>> There's no point supporting another alternative notation, especially if it
>> was effectively unusable for a while now already.
> By the way, this notation is also used by constant() and defined():
>
> $ php -r 'class Foo { const FOO = 3; } var_dump(constant("Foo::FOO"), defined("Foo::FOO"));'
> int(3)
> bool(true)
>
> It’s also very intuitive compared to the function syntax. I see no reason we shouldn’t support it more widely.

+1 on this being more intuitive syntax, although the array syntax is 
convenient for dynamically selecting each part separately, and obviously 
for calling non-static methods.

It actually feels kind of weird that as of PHP 7, an array is more 
callable than a string:

class Foo { static function bar() { echo 'Hello'; } }

Foo::bar(); // OK
['Foo', 'bar'](); // OK
'Foo::bar'(); // FATAL ERROR

http://3v4l.org/f7rvc

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]