Andrea Faulds wrote on 23/01/2015 14:37:
Hey Nikita,
On 20 Jan 2015, at 21:46, Nikita Popov <nikita....@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]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
