On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 at 15:40, Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2022, at 9:31 AM, Marco Pivetta wrote: > > Heyo, > > > > On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 at 15:26, Ilija Tovilo <tovilo.il...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Hi everyone > >> > >> I'd like to propose a simple RFC to introduce looking up class > >> constants by name. We have dedicated syntax for basically all other > >> language constructs. This RFC aims to get rid of this seemingly > >> arbitrary limitation. > >> > >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/dynamic_class_constant_fetch > >> > >> Please let me know if you have any thoughts. > >> > > > > What's the problem with using `constant()` for this? > > > > Marco Pivetta > > > > https://twitter.com/Ocramius > > > > https://ocramius.github.io/ > > As it says right in the RFC: > > // This: > echo Foo::{$bar}; > > // is way more convenient than this mess: > echo constant(Foo::class . '::' . $bar); > > This is something people have mentioned a number of times with enums and > dynamic case references, and seems like a good small cleanup. > What's convenient about `Foo::{$bar}` vs `constant(Foo::class . '::' . $bar)`? I'm a bit confused by this :| Is it the few keystrokes added? Marco Pivetta https://twitter.com/Ocramius https://ocramius.github.io/
