Re: Anonymous functions inside static methods.

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Levi Morrison <morrison.levi@gmail.com>wrote: > > > I think Bar::bar() should definitely return 'Bar' (currently returns > > 'Foo') but what about the Bar::Baz() call? > > I kinda agree, but that ship has sailed and it would be a BC break. > Yes... but we fix bugs all the time that are technically BC breaks. Do you really think we shouldn't fix this? I note in your 3v4l that HHVM does not follow the same rules. > I think HHVM gets the Bar::bar() case correct and we should fix it. I'm not sure if I agree with HHVM's outcome on Bar::baz(). To me the closure is non-static which means it won't invoke late static binding. This is something I'd like to discuss; what do you guys think about that? Another option is to implicitly promote closures inside of static contexts to be also be static; this is basically what HHVM does.