Hi,
My suggestion is to wait until the 15th of January (that's one month
since I started this thread) and that should have been enough time of
everybody.
So, it's 18th - are we moving forward with this?
Yes, Sorry, I've been extremely busy for the last two months, I'll get
back to this in
Hi!
My suggestion is to wait until the 15th of January (that's one month
since I started this thread) and that should have been enough time of
everybody.
So, it's 18th - are we moving forward with this?
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
s...@zend.com http://www.zend.com/
Hello again,
A quick summary of the votes so far (since 15th December):
internals@ votes:
0: (1) Alexey Zakhlestin
A: (1) Hannes Magnusson
C: (0) -
D: (0) -
A+: (2) Christian Seiler, Joey Smith
AS: (1) Stanislav Malyshev
---
5 votes
[AS is Stas' version with
I vote for (A). bind() and bindTo() seem messy to me. However, I
mostly vote for no implicit $this changes in closures (no
javascript-like behaviour), so (A+) approach would be much better than
(C) or (D). (0) case is not my choice, because I really would like to
see $this support in closures
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 08:46:44PM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
(A+): (A) + Closure::bind Closure-bindTo for rebinding
if this is wanted the possibility to call a closure as an object
method. (See last section of RFC for details)
+1 for A+ with class scope option 2
I'm a bit
Hi Lukas,
Call for a vote. This time around people cannot claim to not have had
time to review the issue. Also back then we tried to play it safe
because of the short time before we were to release. This time there is
more time for this to mature if needed inside svn.
Ok, so then I call for
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 20:46, Christian Seiler chris...@gmx.net wrote:
(A): Original closures implementation:
$this is always the object context at
closure creation. No possibility to do
$someObject-closureProperty(...) and thus
no possibility to extend
Hi!
Ok, so then I call for a vote. Again, here are the options:
A+, no direct method calling (get/call problem would be messy)
one additional thing:
$a = static function () {}
should leave $this not bound (in case for some reason you don't want it
to be bound, e.g. to avoid keeping reference
Hi,
Ok, so then I call for a vote. Again, here are the options:
A+, no direct method calling (get/call problem would be messy)
I don't quite follow: Why A+ if no direct method calling? What would be
the point of allowing bindTo() if $obj-closureProp() doesn't work
anyway? If you don't want
On 15.12.2009, at 22:46, Christian Seiler wrote:
Ok, so then I call for a vote. Again, here are the options:
(0): No $this in closures, keep it that way. (keep PHP 5.3 behavior)
I vote for (0)
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit:
A+, but I'm not an internal dev.
On 12/15/2009 21:46, Christian Seiler wrote:
Hi Lukas,
Call for a vote. This time around people cannot claim to not have had
time to review the issue. Also back then we tried to play it safe
because of the short time before we were to release. This time there
Hi,
Maybe I don't exactly understand the need for closureProperty(); also,
I haven't read the rfc ;-)
My understanding would be that you can treat it as a callable object, like so:
$a = function($msg) { echo $this-id, : , $msg, [ calls: ,
++$this-calls, ];
}
$a-id = 123;
$a(hello world);
If
2009/12/15 Ionut G. Stan ionut.g.s...@gmail.com:
A+, but I'm not an internal dev.
On 12/15/2009 21:46, Christian Seiler wrote:
Hi Lukas,
Call for a vote. This time around people cannot claim to not have had
time to review the issue. Also back then we tried to play it safe
because of the
Christian Seiler wrote
Hi Lukas,
Call for a vote. This time around people cannot claim to not have had
time to review the issue. Also back then we tried to play it safe
because of the short time before we were to release. This time there
is
more time for this to mature if needed
On Tuesday 15 December 2009 1:46:44 pm Christian Seiler wrote:
Hi Lukas,
Call for a vote. This time around people cannot claim to not have had
time to review the issue. Also back then we tried to play it safe
because of the short time before we were to release. This time there is
more
15 matches
Mail list logo
