Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC]

This is only part of a thread. view whole thread
  108514
February 12, 2020 18:40 manuelcanga@gmail.com (Manuel Canga)
On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 at 15:08, Dan Ackroyd <Danack@basereality.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 13:19, Nikita Popov ppv@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/consistent_callables. > > > > btw it's probably worth mentioning the other reason I didn't pursue > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/consistent_callables. > > By itself, the callable type isn't much use. It only allows you to > specify that a type can be called, but it doesn't allow you to specify > what parameters the callable should take, or what the return type > should be. > > Just making the callable type be consistent would be a lot of work, > and possibly cause a lot of BC breaks and still not do the useful > thing. > > Instead what would be far more useful would be allow people to define > the callable signature, and use that as a type. > > callable some_callback(int $x, string $y) : int; > > function bar(some_callback $fn) { } > > $fn_correct = function (int $x, string $y) : int {} > $fn_wrong = function (int $x, string $y) : int {} > > Calling bar with $fn_correct should work. > Calling bar with $fn_wrong should give a type error. > > In my opinion, pursuing that idea would be a lot more valuable than > breaking BC for callables without much gain. > > cheers > Dan > Ack >
Hi, internals, I think, we are taking this very far. In Spain, we usually say: "Quien mucho abarca, poco aprieta". In English, I think is similar to: "don’t bite off more than you can chew" or KISS/YAGNI in development. IMO, we should limit RFC to '::function'( scope and accept/reject ). After this, other RFC can be added/checked like Short closures( of Michal ) or other purposes with other variation like :interface and ::trait: ( of Mike ) Respect to ::function: ::function, it should return a string like ::class. This is: Case 1: ::function === \namespace\function_name ( when function_name is imported ) Case 2: ::function === \current_namespace\function_name( when ::function is below a namespace ) Case 3: ::function === \function_name( when ::function is not below a namespace ) Case 4: \namespace\::function === \namespace\function_name Case 5: \::function === \function_name ( equal of 4 but in global context ) Examples: 1. namespace my_project; use function \vendor\I18n\translate; $mapped_array = array_map(translate::function, $array); //= $mapped_array = array_map('\vendor\I18n\translate', $array); 2. namespace my_project; $mapped_array = array_map(translate::function, $array); //= $mapped_array = array_map('\my_project\translate' $array); 3. $mapped_array = array_map(translate::function, $array); //= $mapped_array = array_map('\translate' $array); 4. $mapped_array = array_map(\vendor\I18n\translate::function, $array); //= $mapped_array = array_map('\vendor\I18n\translate' $array); 5. $mapped_array = array_map(\translate::function, $array); //= $mapped_array = array_map('\translate' $array); Although, cases 3, 4 or 5, can appear useless, however editors could distinguish when is a function( and not a ordinary string ) and validate if function exists or not. Regards
  108515
February 12, 2020 18:45 mike@newclarity.net (Mike Schinkel)
> On Feb 12, 2020, at 1:40 PM, Manuel Canga <manuelcanga@gmail.com> wrote: > IMO, we should limit RFC to '::function'( scope and accept/reject ).
Agreed.
> After this, other RFC can be added/checked like Short closures( of Michal ) > or other purposes with other variation like :interface and ::trait: ( of Mike )
This feels a bit Handmaid's Tale-esque. But I digress... :-) -Mike