Re: [RFC] Short-function syntax

On Wed, Nov 4, 2020, at 4:05 PM, Nuno Maduro wrote: > Hey Larry, > > In my vision, this proposal is a good addition to PHP exactly as stated in > this pull request (https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/6221): where only > the "=> expr;" is introduced, and not the "fn". > > For visual consistency in the future of PHP functions/methods, I think it's > important to differ "=> expr;" from "fn": > > - "=> expr;" means "arrow": syntax that defines functions/methods with > one-line return expressions. > - "fn" means "short": syntax that makes functions inherit scope. It's > already in use by arrow short closures ( > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/arrow_functions_v2 ). > > Therefore, from my understanding, your proposal would allow all the > following things to be possible: > ```php > // arrow function > function foo() => /** */; > > // arrow closure > $foo = function () => /** */; > > // fn/short arrow closure ( already introduced in PHP 7.4 ) > $foo = fn() => /** */; > > class Foo { > // arrow method > poublic function bar() => /** */; > } > ``` > > If this proposal keeps using the "function", and not the "fn", I don't > see > any conflict with my Proposal (multi-line short closures - > https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/6246). > > Good luck with the RFC. > > - Nuno Yes, that's how it would fall out, assuming multi-line-arrows happen. I'm honestly still torn on that myself for various reasons, but "=> means expression, fn means auto-capture, use one or both as appropriate" seems like a reasonable syntax guideline that we can teach people. --Larry Garfield