> On Mar 25, 2021, at 12:50 PM, Rowan Tommins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 25/03/2021 15:02, Mike Schinkel wrote:
>> Can you please clarify why "function(...) use(...) {...}" can't be their
>> solution when someone needs by-reference capture?
>
>
> For the same reason - or lack of reason - why it can't be the solution when
> they need by-value capture. In other words, whatever reason people have for
> wanting this RFC.
Are you proposing auto-capture but one that is note able to change the
variable's value in the outer scope?
Since code is worth 1000 words, here is an example of what I think you are
saying:
$x = 1;
example(fn() {
echo $x; // This would print "1"
$x = 2;
echo $x; // This would print "2"
});
echo $x; // This would still print "1"
If that is what you are saying — which I did not get from your prior arguments
— then I myself would be fine with "by-value" capture.
What I like about the RFC is being able to omit the use(...) when referencing
(reading) a variable inside the closure that come from the outer scope. But
almost all of my use-cases would work fine with by-value semantics, and for the
rest I could use "function(...)use(...){...}."
That said, I again suggest this we could omit the "use" keyword for short
functions:
// 2nd set of parens acts as an implied "use":
example( fn()(&$var) => $var = value() );
-Mike
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
