Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=65598&edit=1
ID: 65598
User updated by: php at davidstockton dot com
Reported by: php at davidstockton dot com
Summary: Closure executed via static autoload incorrectly
marked as static
Status: Open
Type: Bug
Package: Scripting Engine problem
Operating System: Centos 6
PHP Version: 5.5.3
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
New Comment:
Your examples make sense. However in this particular case, it seems to make
sense
that the autoloader's "staticness" would or should not affect the things that
are
loaded via the autoloader-i.e, make a special case for autoloaders.
The behavior of the code should not be changed based on whether the code was
loaded via a static or non-static autoloader.
Previous Comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2013-09-18 06:52:29] bixuehujin at gmail dot com
Indeedï¼it is odd and out of expect.
AFAIK, there is no difference between create closure in static methods and
require a file that will create a closure. Because of the created closure in
both have the same scope.
Consider the following two examples:
1: create closure in static method
//main.php
class Test {
public static function createClosure() {
$c = function () {
//some code
};
return $c;
}
}
2: create closure in a single file and require it
//main.php
class Test {
public static function createClosure() {
require 'closure.php';
return $c;
}
}
//closure.php
$c = function () {
//some code
};
The both examples have the same behavior, and both scope of $c are Test.
But according to the invariants in Zend/zend_closures.c, say:
> If the closure is unscoped, it has no bound object.
> The the closure is scoped, it's either static or it's bound
> see detail:
> https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/47ee470992014c738891d05b5acc89c2de90f2ac/Zend/zend_closures.c#L483,L498
So the behavior of this issue is valid according to the invariants.
*By the way, i am also want to know why we should have the invariants.*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2013-09-17 21:30:38] php at davidstockton dot com
The closure is not created in a static method, it's just loaded via an
autoloader
that happens to be static. Seems odd that we should expect different behavior
of the
code based on if the autoloader is static or non-static.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2013-09-17 20:52:18] bixuehujin at gmail dot com
The reason is closures created in static methods are static, even without the
keyword.
see
https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/a447acdcc6f12ea3a5dcd22416cb033e62995935/Zend/tests/closure_045.phpt
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2013-08-30 23:55:29] php at davidstockton dot com
Description:
------------
If I load a class via a static autoloader which has executable code (including
a
closure) and then try to bind the closure to an object of the class, I get a
warning and error:
Warning: Cannot bind an instance to a static closure
and
Fatal error: Using $this when not in object context
If I run the script directly (not via autoloader) everything works as expected.
If I make the autoloader non-static, everything works as expected.
Test script:
---------------
Sample contains two files, a static autoloader which will load the class file
and the class file which also contains executable code.
If the autoloader is a plain function or a non-static method then the code
works as expected. If the executable code is removed from the class file and
placed into the autoloader file, everything works as expected.
php Autoloader.php (bad behavior)
php ClosureBug.php (correct behavior)
https://gist.github.com/dstockto/6395158
Expected result:
----------------
42
Actual result:
--------------
Warning: Cannot bind an instance to a static closure in
/vagrant/src/Bug/ClosureBug.php on line 9
Fatal error: Using $this when not in object context in
/vagrant/src/Bug/ClosureBug.php on line 19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=65598&edit=1
