Re: Re: [RFC] Arrow functions / short closures

Den 2019-04-10 kl. 10:39, skrev Rowan Collins:

On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 11:20, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:

The ==> syntax is the other one I implemented ( https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/3945). The implementation is based on lexer lookahead, which is ugly but still manageable. I haven't seen much support for this variant in this discussion though. And of course, if there's no strong preference for ==>, I'd rather go with the variant that is easier for us (and all 3rd party tooling) to support from a technical perspective.

I'd just like to amplify this mention of 3rd party tooling: if we go with something which requires complex lexer/parser rules, then every editor, IDE, and static analysis tool will need to also work with that syntax. For those saying they "slightly prefer" ==> please ask yourself, do you prefer it enough to add complexity to every tool that wants to process PHP source code? Regards, Hi,

Could then the \($x) syntax be a good compromise between readability & implementation? It also has the advantage of having less BC impact, since the fn keyword must be a full keyword according to RFC. As a side note I'm thinking on if the Hacklang implementation could shed some light on tooling issues that they got, due to their implementation of the ==> syntax. r//Björn L