Re: [RFC][Dynamic class constant fetch]
| From: | Marco Pivetta | Date: | Fri, 04 Nov 2022 14:48:33 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC][Dynamic class constant fetch] | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-118964@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 at 15:40, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2022, at 9:31 AM, Marco Pivetta wrote:
> > Heyo,
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 at 15:26, Ilija Tovilo <tovilo.ilija@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi everyone
> >>
> >> I'd like to propose a simple RFC to introduce looking up class
> >> constants by name. We have dedicated syntax for basically all other
> >> language constructs. This RFC aims to get rid of this seemingly
> >> arbitrary limitation.
> >>
> >> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/dynamic_class_constant_fetch
> >>
> >> Please let me know if you have any thoughts.
> >>
> >
> > What's the problem with using
constant() for this?
> >
> > Marco Pivetta
> >
> > https://twitter.com/Ocramius
> >
> > https://ocramius.github.io/
>
> As it says right in the RFC:
>
> // This:
> echo Foo::{$bar};
>
> // is way more convenient than this mess:
> echo constant(Foo::class . '::' . $bar);
>
> This is something people have mentioned a number of times with enums and
> dynamic case references, and seems like a good small cleanup.
>
What's convenient about Foo::{$bar} vs `constant(Foo::class . '::' .
$bar)`? I'm a bit confused by this :|
Is it the few keystrokes added?
Marco Pivetta
https://twitter.com/Ocramius
https://ocramius.github.io/