Re: Raising the precedence of the new operator

On Mon, Apr 5, 2021, 19:42 Mike Schinkel <mike@newclarity.net> wrote: > > > On Apr 5, 2021, at 12:47 PM, Ben Ramsey <ben@benramsey.com> wrote: > > > >> On Apr 5, 2021, at 11:40, André Hänsel <andre@webkr.de> wrote: > >> > >> I was wondering... PHP is the only language I know of where you have to > >> write (new Foo())->bar() instead of > >> new Foo()->bar(). This is particularly apparent > >> with the builder > pattern: > >> > >> $developer->drink((new Coffee())->withCream()->withSugar()); > >> $logger->log((new LogMessage())->withMessage('Coffee was drunk')); > >> > >> Since new Foo()->bar() cannot (and probably should > >> not) be used to > >> "dynamically instantiate a new thing of the class > >> name returned by function Foo()", it seems like it would be no problem > to > >> change the precedence rules so that > >> new Foo()->bar() means "instantiate a new Foo > >> and call bar() on it". > >> > >> It's currently a syntax error, so allowing it would be automatically > >> compatible. > >> > >> Has this ever been discussed before? > > > > > > Mike Schinkel and I recently discussed this off-list. Mike, now’s your > > time to chime in with your ideas on this. :-) > > Thanks for the invite. > > I had asked Ben what he thought about allowing the following syntax as a > synonym for new Foo(): > > Foo::new() > > That would be backward compatible because you currently cannot have a > method named new(). > I have static ctors named new in multiple codebases: https://3v4l.org/FudWpk >