Re: Proposal to deprecate create_function()

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> wrote: > On 15/10/2013 17:11, Johannes Schlüter wrote: >> >> In general: Getting rid of it is good. But mind that closures are no >> full replacement as with create_function() the code can be created on >> the fly. > > > Yes, I agree that there is no trvial solution which is 100% feature (and > bug) compatible with create_function(). However, I think the more important > question is whether there are any particular *use cases* which can't be > easily migrated to a different mechanism. That's the actual question, why should they? > My gut feel is that at least 95% of uses of create_function are to create > dynamic callbacks for usort, preg_replace_callback, array_filter, etc. For > these uses, the implementation as an eval() is a liability, and > reimplementing with real closures is trivial (assuming no need to run on > <=5.2). Yes, as many other new features allow cleaner codes. However I do not see this case as good enough to add more deprecated notices to perfectly valid codes. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org