On 11 Aug 2014, at 12:08, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I understand that &$foo->method won't work, but that's what I mean by > pre-supposing the proposed syntax. > > If you had a different syntax, such as £function (I know it's not a sensible > choice, but it's an example of something with no conflict), you *would* be > able to implement £$foo->method. It would "do the same thing calls do", which > is call a non-static method non-statically. > > So the question is, is it a) desirable and b) practical to come up with an > implementation where that is possible? Ah, I see what you’re saying. It’s certainly worth thinking about. & isn’t really the nicest of syntaxes. > Yep, that's my point - referencing a method without also referencing the > class or object it's bound to is not something that usually happens in PHP, > so it feels odd to make it the default behaviour here. > > Your proposal requires that to create a reference to a non-static method of > the current object, you would do something like this: > > $foo = &static::foo; > $foo->bindTo($this); > > We could imagine instead having a factory like Closure::wrap(callable $c), > where the exact equivalent would be: > > $foo = Closure::wrap([static::class, 'foo']); > $foo->bindTo($this); > > But you would never write it that way, because we have a way of specifying > callables for instance methods, so you'd just write this: > > $foo = Closure::wrap([$this, 'foo']); > > You might for some reason want to re-bind that to a different object > (although I'm not sure why, outside of things you'd expect to use Reflection > for anyway), but the default would be referencing its existing binding. I think Closure::bind(&FooBar::foo, ‘FooBar’); works well, but yes, I can see your point. > In which case what do you think of my second suggestion, of adding methods to > allow people to tell whether a closure is bound, bindable, etc? It makes it > much easier to write defensive code if you can predict errors rather than > catching them. I’m totally in favour of that. One thing I’d like to see, if we introduce references for functions and classes and so on, is more reflection-like stuff. I think it’s a bit silly to have to instantiate reflection classes all the time. Given that closures are already objects, I see no reason why you should need to use ReflectionFunction on them. Rather, we should provide all this information on the object directly. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/ -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
