On Friday, October 26, 2018 7:29:46 AM CDT Crocodile wrote:
> Hi internals!
>
> I have this idea of improving the way to specify callbacks for good old PHP
> functions. For instance, I have this piece of code:
>
> ---------------
> array_filter($names, 'trim')
> ---------------
>
> The callback function name is specified as a string, which makes it
> not-so-obvious, although this is definitely a PHP way. An alternative would
> be to rewrite this using a lambda:
>
> ---------------
> array_filter($names, function($name) { return trim($name); })
> ---------------
>
> This is way more wordy, and I bet most of us will go for the first option.
>
> What if we had a more clear way of specifying those callbacks? I suggest
> the following:
>
> ---------------
> array_filter($names, function::trim)
> ---------------
>
> It is, I believe, more clear then a simple string, just a bit more wordy,
> and since "function" is a reserved word which never had anything to do with
> "::", the lexer/parser could probably find a way to deal with this kind of
> syntax (well, honestly, this part is totally unclear for me because I only
> work with PHP from userland).
>
> Does anyone else find this could be a good addition? Or is it not worth
> considering? Or maybe I am missing some obvious pitfalls?
>
> Cheers,
> VictorI believe the proposal for short lambas (which should get resurrected at some point) would handle this case well enough as well as help a dozen other things. To wit: array_filter($names, |$x| ==> trim($x)) --Larry Garfield
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
