Re: [Vote] Pipe operator v2

Hey Larry, I just voted "NO" on this: it took me a long time to decide, because I've been vouching for pipe-alike operators myself for a while. The reason why I voted "no" is that this is feasible with a `pipe(callable $first, callable ...$piped)` function, without having to add syntax/AST for it. Type safety for such a closure would still be very messy, but feasible with some macro-based templating of docblocks. The simplistic approach to this is simple composition (the . you mentioned): ```php /** * @template TIn of mixed * @template TOut of mixed * * @param callable(TIn): TIntermediate $first * @param callable(TIntermediate): TOut $piped * * @return callable(TIn): TOut * @return TOut */ function pipe(callable $first, callable $piped): callable { } ``` Pol Dellaiera (https://github.com/drupol) has done a lot of work around this stuff, specifically the type inference bit, in https://github.com/loophp/combinator , so I see hope to get better types at a later stage. Therefore: * userland runtime **implementation** is trivial * userland type-safe definition is non-trivial, but not insurmountable Marco Pivetta http://twitter.com/Ocramius http://ocramius.github.com/ On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 7:13 PM Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote: > I have opened the vote on the Pipe operator RFC: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pipe-operator-v2 > > The vote will close on 20 July. > > -- > Larry Garfield > larry@garfieldtech.com > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > >