> On Jul 2, 2021, at 12:30 AM, Hossein Baghayi <hossein.bagh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 at 19:09, Ralph Schindler <ra...@ralphschindler.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> This proposes a method for a publisher/framework/producer (the caller of
>> the callback) to document all the parameters that are available as named
>> parameters, and subscribers/consumers (creator of the callback) could
>> subscribe to what they need by name.
>>
>
> Wouldn't it rather be nice if we had more detailed callable types instead?
> I mean instead of simply defining a parameter type as `callable` we could
> specifically define what the callable expects.
>
> Something like this:
> ```
> function bar ((int, string):bool $callback) {...}
> ```
>
> A more generic approach that could be more descriptive, maybe.
>
> I have no clue if this was already discussed in other threads or not. And
> whether it is feasible to implement.
From 2015 which failed (not sure why):
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/callable-types
But I believe that would be better to be part of a broader ability to define
our own types, e.g.
type function(int, string):bool IntStrFunc;
function bar (intStrFunc $callback) {...}
I think a few have mentioned user-defined types in the recent past but I am not
aware of it being a current RFC for it.
-Mike
