Dan Ackroyd wrote:
> Yes, but the difference is in the surprise factor.
>
> Two functions having a circular dependency ==> not too astonishing,
> and easy to think about.
>
> Reading the value of a variable having a circular dependency ==> give
> up programming to become a farmer.
Okay, so we can
On 24 July 2016 at 06:14, David Rodrigues wrote:
> Now back to topic, this circular dependency too occur with functions.
Yes, but the difference is in the surprise factor.
Two functions having a circular dependency ==> not too astonishing,
and easy to think about.
Reading the value of a variabl
Dan Ackroyd wrote:
> This looks to solve a problem very similar to the one solved by the
> 'Memoize' annotation in HHVM -
> https://docs.hhvm.com/hack/attributes/special#__memoize
> However the memoize functionality seems a lot clearer to me, as it's
> less 'magic'; it doesn't make accessing a var
Hi!
> This Feature Request is about the implementation of lazy statements.
>
> Basically it should implements a 'lazy' keyword (or similar) and
> structured like an anonymous function, except that it doesn't accepts
> arguments, but accept the use() feature.
>
> $var = lazy { return 1; }
Is
Hi David,
On 21 July 2016 at 16:51, David Rodrigues wrote:
> This Feature Request is about the implementation of lazy statements.
This looks to solve a problem very similar to the one solved by the
'Memoize' annotation in HHVM -
https://docs.hhvm.com/hack/attributes/special#__memoize
However th
> However, that also means there's an enormous potential for race
> conditions. Technically no more than closures now, but the use cases
> seem like they'd make it more prevalent. If you "use" by reference, or
> use a mutable object, or a service that depends on IO, etc. then the
> resulting valu
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016, at 10:51 AM, David Rodrigues wrote:
> This Feature Request is about the implementation of lazy statements.
>
> Basically it should implements a 'lazy' keyword (or similar) and
> structured like an anonymous function, except that it doesn't accepts
> arguments, but accept the
