On 14 February 2020 00:39:15 GMT+00:00, Mike Schinkel <m...@newclarity.net>
wrote:
>> On Feb 13, 2020, at 7:24 PM, Rowan Tommins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> An idea I had earlier which might solve some of them is if what was
>returned was not a normal Closure instance, but a new class like
>FunctionReference. It could then "remember" the name of the function
>wrapped, and implement __toString, Serializable, etc. It could inherit
>from Closure, so instanceof checks would work, and bindTo would return
>a normal Closure. I'm sure there's downsides I haven't thought of yet,
>but I thought I'd throw the idea into the mix.
>
>I thought about that too, and mentioned it yesterday in a reply[1] to
>you on this list.
>
>Here is the link to the Gist with the hypothetical code using such a
>concept:
>
>- https://gist.github.com/mikeschinkel/78684d708358e1d101e319c7a2fdef9c
What I had in mind was a combination of that and the existing Closure class, so:
$ref = foo::fn;
$ref(); // run the function
$ref->name; // access extra metadata
$ref->bindTo($whatever); // get a new Closure with a bound context
That would also combine well with one of the proposed bracket style syntaxes
that let you specify methods more naturally:
{foo}->name; // qualified name of local function
{Foo::bar}; // closure for a static method
{$this->baz}->bindTo($that); // closure for a method of current class rebound
to a different object
Regards,
--
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
