Re: [RFC] Allow "use( $longname as $alias)" syntax for closures declaration

On 2012-04-13, Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com> wrote: > --f46d04016a77a386cf04bd8a62df > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > > $closure = function () use ($this->getFooBar() as $foo) { > > $foo->stuff(); > > } > > But this can already be written as : > > $closure = function () { > $foo = $this->getFooBar(); > $foo->stuff(); > } > > Here, $foo also only exists inside the closure. You're missing the point. Yes, the original used "$this->getFooBar()" -- but it could have been "$someOtherObject->getFooBar()" -- in which case you either have to bind $someOtherObject, or grab the return of getFooBar(). Also, getFooBar() would be called _once_ in the original example, instead of once each time the closure is invoked (your example). > > Also, remember that the closure is in fact another function, a function > > that performs its own actions independent of the parent. > > Actions may be independent, but as a closure is declared inside its parent, > both codes have very strong relationship. For the reader, overriding this > relationship with new closure-local var names can weaken its understanding > of the code don't you think? The closure is a function itself; readability within it is just as important as readability of the parent. I'd personally rather not have a lot of boilerplate code marshalling variables to start off my closure -- I'd rather they were simply declared and ready for use. -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney Project Lead | matthew@zend.com Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/ PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc