On Mon, March 19, 2007 3:35 pm, Robert Cummings wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 15:20 -0500, Richard Lynch wrote:
>> On Sun, March 18, 2007 6:41 pm, Wez Furlong wrote:
>> > We've been daydreaming about the ability to do something like this
>> in
>> > PHP:
>> >
>> > $data = array("zoo", "orange", "car", "lemon", "apple");
>> > usort($data, function($a, $b) { return strcmp($a, $b); });
>> > var_dump($data); # data is sorted alphabetically
>>
>> I'd LOVE it if there was SOME difference between this and a normal
>> 'function' definition...
>>
>> I guess we're kind of stuck with 'create_function' being the mess
>> that
>> it is.
>>
>> But perhaps something like 'temp_function' or 'local_function' or
>> 'lexical_closure' or something similar. Even 'horse' [*] would be
>> fine by me.
>>
>> I think it muddies things too much to have it just be 'function'
>> with
>> no name after it.
>>
>> +1
>
> A function with a name is no longer anonymous ;)
I am not suggesting that there be a name.
I am suggesting that the reserved keyword for an anonymous function
should not be 'function', the same as a normal function.
--
Some people have a "gift" link here.
Know what I want?
I want you to buy a CD from some starving artist.
http://cdbaby.com/browse/from/lynch
Yeah, I get a buck. So?
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
