I don't think it's quite the same, and although I can agree that short
lambdas look better then normal in this context, I would still prefer
function::trim
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 5:42 PM Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com>
wrote:
> 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($names, function::trim)
> > ---------------
> >
> > It is, I believe, more clear then a simple string, just a bit more wordy,
> > and since "function" is a reserved word which never had anything to do
> with
> > "::", the lexer/parser could probably find a way to deal with this kind
> of
> > syntax (well, honestly, this part is totally unclear for me because I
> only
> > work with PHP from userland).
> >
> > Does anyone else find this could be a good addition? Or is it not worth
> > considering? Or maybe I am missing some obvious pitfalls?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Victor
>
> I believe the proposal for short lambas (which should get resurrected at
> some
> point) would handle this case well enough as well as help a dozen other
> things. To wit:
>
> array_filter($names, |$x| ==> trim($x))
>
> --Larry Garfield
--
Best regards,
Victor Bolshov
