Re: RFC [Discussion]: Closure self-reference

> On 4 Jun 2023, at 02:11, Dan Ackroyd <Danack@basereality.com> wrote: > > Hi internals, > > I'm now opening the discussion for the Closure self-reference RFC: > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/closure_self_reference > > This was previously discussed as a draft here: > https://externals.io/message/112216#112216 > > Thank-you to KapitanOczywisty for the implementation. > > cheers > Dan > Ack > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > Hi Dan, I quite like this idea, but, to (ab)use the analogy, the syntax bike shed definitely needs a few more sample tins. The various syntax choices that introduce a new variable all seem like they can easily lead to developer confusion about where each of the two variables are actually defined and what is valid.. I can see plenty of “$closure = fn() as $closure => ….;` just because people are unsure. Is there a syntax issue with e.g. fn::self / function::self for this? I realise this is mostly just a variation on Closure::current() but it “feels” a bit more natural, and has the added benefit that it *could* be extended to return a closure of **any** function, including regular named methods/functions etc in a later RFC, if there’s demand for it. Cheers Stephen