Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:87979
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BLU436-SMTP13020F8CE8795C628BDC665E26B0@phx.gbl>
References: <BLU436-SMTP13020F8CE8795C628BDC665E26B0@phx.gbl>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 10:32:39 +0200
Message-ID: <CAB6YZuyNSBk20OBa+tNFFMa1vJcooe7=YaRdz3meJ6BHD7SyyA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Short Closures
From: pajousek@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Pavel_Kou=C5=99il?=)

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I had this RFC in draft since some time, but delayed it due to all the ongoing PHP 7 discussions. Also we have no master branch to merge features in until 5.4 EOL. Thus I'm reviving this now.
>
> Time for the first RFC targeting PHP 7.1 (assuming PHP 8 isn't going to be the next version ;-)):
>
> The short Closures RFC:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/short_closures
>
> Hoping for constructive feedback,
> Bob
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>

Hi,

as a purely userland developer, I would definitely appreciate the
shorthand function for anonymous functions; having tons of stuff like
"function ($x) { return $x * 2; }"  makes the code less readable in
the end.

I'm not sure about the "auto using" of all variables though; wouldnt
it be possible to statically check for the used variables and only
import what's needed, for performance reasons?

Also, how hard would it be to add type hints (only for parameters)?
Sometimes they are needed to make the IDE know the variable type
because it can't be guessed automatically. I know about your note in
RFC,this is just a question to other internal members.Return type can
be infered by IDEs from the simple expresion quite easily.

PS: would "() ~> foo()" work? I think it should, but I couldn't find a
mention about it in RFC. :)

Regards
Pavel Kouril