Re: An implementation of a short syntax for closures
| From: | Victor Bolshov | Date: | Thu, 04 Aug 2011 12:57:21 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: An implementation of a short syntax for closures | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-54356@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
+1 - think everybody'd want their functions to be searchable and searching
for complex patterns like "(function)|(\|\=\>)" would really be a headache.
Btw, am I the only one to whom the proposed syntax seems kinda hieroglyphic?
2011/8/4 Antony Dovgal <tony@daylessday.org>
> On 08/04/2011 04:39 PM, Lazare Inepologlou wrote:
>
>> ... ( $x ) => $x + 1 for example would be ambiguous if used in an array
>>> definition, but is otherwise the best in terms of readability.
>>>
>>
>> ... people wanted an easy way to grep for function declarations
>>>
>>
>>
>> A new and unique operator (like the |=> I have proposed) is a solution
>> that works because:
>>
>
> Please stop that, it's not funny anymore.
>
> --
> Wbr,
> Antony Dovgal
> ---
> http://pinba.org - realtime profiling for PHP
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>