> On 4 Jun 2023, at 02:11, Dan Ackroyd <dan...@basereality.com> wrote:
>
> Hi internals,
>
> I'm now opening the discussion for the Closure self-reference RFC:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closure_self_reference
>
> This was previously discussed as a draft here:
> https://externals.io/message/112216#112216
>
> Thank-you to KapitanOczywisty for the implementation.
>
> cheers
> Dan
> Ack
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
Hi Dan,
I quite like this idea, but, to (ab)use the analogy, the syntax bike shed
definitely needs a few more sample tins.
The various syntax choices that introduce a new variable all seem like they can
easily lead to developer confusion about where each of the two variables are
actually defined and what is valid.. I can see plenty of “$closure = fn() as
$closure => ….;` just because people are unsure.
Is there a syntax issue with e.g. `fn::self` / `function::self` for this? I
realise this is mostly just a variation on `Closure::current()` but it “feels”
a bit more natural, and has the added benefit that it *could* be extended to
return a closure of **any** function, including regular named methods/functions
etc in a later RFC, if there’s demand for it.
Cheers
Stephen
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
