[Vote] Partial Function Application v2

I hereby open the vote on Partial Function Application:

https://wiki.php.net/rfc/partial_function_application_v2

The vote will be open for a little over 2 weeks, automatically closing
at 2025-12-05 T 12:00:00, UTC. (That's 2 weeks and a couple hours,
just to be safe.)

--
Larry Garfield
larry@garfieldtech.com

And as requested off-list, the discussion thread is here:

https://externals.io/message/127781

--Larry Garfield

The vote has now closed. The RFC is adopted unanimously 33-0-0.

Thanks, everyone! We'll get the PR merged soonish. PHP 8.6 is off to a great start. :-)

--Larry Garfield

Hi

https://wiki.php.net/rfc/partial_function_application_v2

As part of my work on the PFA-for-$this RFC I noticed one thing that is
left undefined in the RFC text and AFAICT not currently tested with the
implementation PR, but appears to “just work” is late-static binding
with static:::

 <?php

 class P {
     public static function m(string $a): void {
         echo __METHOD__, PHP_EOL;
         var_dump($a);
     }

     public static function get() {
         return static::m(?);
     }
 }

 class C extends P {
     public static function m(string|array $b): void {
         echo __METHOD__, PHP_EOL;
         var_dump($b);
     }
 }

 P::get()(a: 'a');
 C::get()(b: []);

This correctly results in:

 P::m
 string(1) "a"
 C::m
 array(0) {
 }

being output.

Can you please make sure to include this as an Erratum within the RFC
text (and also make sure it gets a proper test in the PR, including all
possible OPcache variations)?

Best regards
Tim Düsterhus

Thanks Tim, good catch. I have added an errata to that effect; Arnaud's on vacation this week but will add some tests when he returns.

--Larry Garfield