Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Arrow functions / short closures

This is only part of a thread. view whole thread
  105283
April 15, 2019 11:48 benjamin.morel@gmail.com (Benjamin Morel)
Even though I was originally hoping for something closer to JS syntax,
considering Nikita's summary it looks like the best contender is still
fn(), as originally proposed.
At least it looks like a function indeed, to the uninitiated.

So FWIW, I think that a vote for the fn() syntax only still makes sense.
The risk with the 2 or 3 options is never being able to reach a concensus:
is a relative majority or an absolute majority for one of the syntaxes
acceptable, or are you required by the RFC process to get a 2/3 majority
for this vote as well? If so, considering the discussion so far, I think
this will be hard to achieve with 2 choices, let alone with 3.

- Ben
  105285
April 15, 2019 12:04 bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Bj=c3=b6rn_Larsson?=)
Den 2019-04-15 kl. 13:48, skrev Benjamin Morel:
> Even though I was originally hoping for something closer to JS syntax, > considering Nikita's summary it looks like the best contender is still > fn(), as originally proposed. > At least it looks like a function indeed, to the uninitiated. > > So FWIW, I think that a vote for the fn() syntax only still makes > sense. The risk with the 2 or 3 options is never being able to reach a > concensus: is a relative majority or an absolute majority for one of > the syntaxes acceptable, or are you required by the RFC process to get > a 2/3 majority for this vote as well? If so, considering the > discussion so far, I think this will be hard to achieve with 2 > choices, let alone with 3. > > - Ben
If it lands in a secondary three way vote I would assume it's the vote getting the most votes. Otherwise the RFC could land in a limbo, getting yes on feature but no on syntax. Good to get assumption confirmed though... r//Björn L
  105311
April 17, 2019 14:03 larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield")
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019, at 6:48 AM, Benjamin Morel wrote:
> Even though I was originally hoping for something closer to JS syntax, > considering Nikita's summary it looks like the best contender is still > fn(), as originally proposed. > At least it looks like a function indeed, to the uninitiated. > > So FWIW, I think that a vote for the fn() syntax only still makes sense. > The risk with the 2 or 3 options is never being able to reach a concensus: > is a relative majority or an absolute majority for one of the syntaxes > acceptable, or are you required by the RFC process to get a 2/3 majority > for this vote as well? If so, considering the discussion so far, I think > this will be hard to achieve with 2 choices, let alone with 3. > > - Ben
I don't think the wiki currently supports it, but that's exactly what ranked choice voting is for. :-) --Larry Garfield