Re: [RFC]
| From: | Manuel Canga | Date: | Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:08:55 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-108466@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi, Diogo
That's right. I could be useful with classes as well.
I was thinking about 'function' or 'func'. 'function' is more
semantic, but 'func' is used with "short functions"( PHP 7.4 ) and
these will be used for callbacks. Then I think 'func' will be more
consistent.
Thanks, Diogo,
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 12:51, Diogo Galvao <diogo86@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 8:14 AM Manuel Canga <manuelcanga@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi internals,
> > I Would like to present a possible new "::func resolution" for your
> > consideration.
> ...
> > use function \My\I18N\i18n_translate;
> >
> > $mapped_array = array_map(i18n_translate::func, $array);
> ...
> > What is your opinion ? Do you see it useful ?
>
> I've wished for this on many occasions and think it'd be really useful, as long
> as it could work with methods as well:
>
> $mapped_array = array_map(I18N::translate::function, $array);
>
> For what it's worth I guess it could just return [I18N::class, 'translate'].
>
> Also for keeping consistency and avoiding new keywords wouldn't it fit better as
> ::function instead of ::func?
>
>
> Best regards.
> Diogo