Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88400
Return-Path: <ppetermann80@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 12364 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2015 08:42:25 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 22 Sep 2015 08:42:25 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ppetermann80@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ppetermann80@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.175 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ppetermann80@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.212.175 mail-wi0-f175.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.212.175] ([209.85.212.175:37938] helo=mail-wi0-f175.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 27/57-56639-07411065 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 04:42:24 -0400
Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so12687992wic.1
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 01:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        bh=0XXGsHuNGZ7UHhuxs60j+9NXff8laEzblkaKlfXNulY=;
        b=vXiffbGBGphxg9TShJPSVOlNhrb2gwOt1YqWgkdUGuZegXc2YvvcFMf+qGJBXhoGwg
         F2w20h6BvWcIFulpkKDwJ1Rvpvt1+hOybtBmP4YqbzcIOfF+ty6/rG5p5aIeGzQTq2vb
         3SQQR6/3+nNkQD85dr6zknh4YgTA8/l1FKznNybZKJG5wiIbOFDP+CwJJUKXd/Rf5n4T
         EJJro46EXXyk0F8e/O4IWBJXMrDoacN8LMagPuiVh5NKQj3mBXvvuC0hsvZ8T5wY8PKF
         gRBK2V/X3upHAbA+z7BLdqgztUoMCoean/0m6kYA1LWcJ5Z63FuqIxQsn97xK2jFQ5y9
         WxMg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.9.42 with SMTP id w10mr26847746wja.146.1442911342000;
 Tue, 22 Sep 2015 01:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.163.10 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 01:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BLU436-SMTP156E8D7D141A710541FCA0FE2450@phx.gbl>
References: <BLU436-SMTP156E8D7D141A710541FCA0FE2450@phx.gbl>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:42:21 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKs572XtvV0=ib6hiwDD3rKOaVxxbCwmU=TL58vCbc7e5t5w4Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b450496fb7ff4052051f97f
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Short Closures
From: ppetermann80@gmail.com (Peter Petermann)

--047d7b450496fb7ff4052051f97f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi,

The introduction claims:

"he current implementation of anonymous functions in PHP is quite verbose
compared to other languages. That makes using anonymous functions be more
difficult than it could be, as there is both more to type, and more
importantly the current implementation makes it hard to read (and so
maintain) code that uses anonymous functions."

I personally feel that the "verbosity" of the way PHP is doing closures at
the moment is a good thing. It is much more readable and clear what is
happening than with ~>.
I further believe that the automatic binding of variables creates a lot
*less* clear and maintainable code, easy to be misunderstood and prone for
mistakes.

Which to me means the Proposal is actually doing the opposite of what it
claims to improve.

hence, i voted against it.

regards,
Peter Petermann

--047d7b450496fb7ff4052051f97f--