Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:99563
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain mindplay.dk from 209.85.192.180 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2d89daaa-056f-3dcb-a5f2-b790affe203a@garfieldtech.com>
References: <CAFMT4Npoo_ZrRk-kk4C6KHYEtV93pU7Wmh0FhaPi6Z-9qkObaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAESVnVrLG4nRrcm7MYAQutb4umLq=FkGo2CWHYqHw+bYo72Bsg@mail.gmail.com>
 <d45a3327-59d4-5c93-1425-70cc2d08a87e@telia.com> <CAESVnVpQtLXhKnUn2EE4s7rZn11r5Kpj2zOSOKRCWFaxaeOrjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <b1105f90-91e9-e61a-b96b-5078c337ab5c@telia.com> <b47c4379-109c-c289-1077-b42ea40fe19f@telia.com>
 <ca6f11d0-5da3-757c-7acd-4acd79a876f1@fleshgrinder.com> <5fe1eefe-1c4f-4c31-c975-ab6c768c977c@telia.com>
 <E56D1F4A-6DC7-47DA-BAD6-1722E017B048@me.com> <CADqTB_jDmFZZc3ah=J8F99P77qnuWVgXS5UwXgrbartCp5B+UQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3C763609-54FC-480B-AE95-94A1873226E0@me.com> <CADqTB_hU+38TOHdaukhGBS-2NPq-PNSci1h078TPOGbE7WcmWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <9A3447BF-F982-4C5A-B55B-466036AF2E53@me.com> <CAFMT4NrdCRJxGyeGqLbAoaV896FN6VpDjY-68trXoaRgZe4VyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_hT-Nd5wX129GgeQxL8RNJ85maSPOPHUt-2NK-ef3yF-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_hB1ifmXu4VO6Z4A3gN=2AF_PU4C8yCYXz8QN6zZ_k=6w@mail.gmail.com> <2d89daaa-056f-3dcb-a5f2-b790affe203a@garfieldtech.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 22:22:53 +0200
Message-ID: <CADqTB_gN+bdU9HBbyjpJJCK7FxO_rQi9hmEuhANGEkc52mpHtw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114d114c5a0a5e055255e6d2"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC]Discuss] Syntax for Arrow Functions
From: rasmus@mindplay.dk (Rasmus Schultz)

--001a114d114c5a0a5e055255e6d2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

So what's on the table is a syntax-improved but feature-crippled variant of
closures, not an all-round replacement?

If I have to factor back and forth between new and old syntax every time a
closure changes from one to multiple or back to one statement, then,
frankly, what's the point?

I think I would just keep using the old syntax, then - for consistency, and
to save myself the frustration of factoring back and forth.

The old syntax is a burden, but a new feature with limited applicability,
honestly, I think would be even more of a burden.

In my opinion, if this is worth doing, it's worth doing it right.


On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On 06/19/2017 03:45 PM, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
>
>> Or maybe it'll look okay if you format the code?
>>
>>      $things->forEach({$v => {
>>          foo($v);
>>          bar($v);
>>      }});
>>
>> Still looks kinda crazy with the closing "}})" though...
>>
>
> Multi-line lambdas should use the existing syntax without changes. The
> only thing being discussed here is single-statement lambdas that you would
> want to inline and think of as an expression rather than a function call.
> If you need something more complex than that just use the existing syntax.
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--001a114d114c5a0a5e055255e6d2--