I like this syntax and expected behavior.
The only problem is implementation.

Anonymous functions those don't capture variables from lexical scope can be
compiled once at file compile time, instead of evaluating in
create_function(). But I don't see how it can be done with variable
capturing.

Thanks. Dmitry.

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

IIRC, it was shot down. Use overloading and interfaces to get similar
effects.

regards,
Lukas

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

You're right, it was, that's why we have interfaces.

Zeev

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

create_function() accepts a string, and that string is constructed with
full access to the lexical scope of the creating function, so I'm not
exactly sure how it's different. My ML/LISP memory fails me.

Since when do we consider moving towards LISP a good thing?

For those odd ends where you really need that, create_function() can do the
job for you just as well (before anybody complains that it's cumbersome -
GOOD, it's supposed to be, you're not supposed to be creating functions on
the fly unless you absolutely have to).

Zeev

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Hello George,


MB>>>> * Anonymous functions. The real stuff, not just some odd string*
MB>>>> passed to create_function().
MB>>>
MB>>>There were some others already asking for this, maybe we should at least
MB>>>give it a thought if it is doable at all, anybody?


4) Speed/Security. create_function() takes a string which is compiled at
run-time. An unnamed function syntax would allow compilation at original
compile time thus allowing compiler caching (speed) and prevents from
executing modified code which is bad anyways (security). Last but not
least for small functions the syntax support leeds to much more readable
code, while on the other hand some tools might have trouble with
create_function() strings.

Best regards,
Marcus

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Hello Zeev,


Exactly. And you can emulate MI with __call().

The only thing we could probably add is delegates to overcome the
anti-code-reuse interface aspect.

// Some interface
interface Printable {
function print();
}

// A general implementation for the interface
class PrintHandler implements Printable {
function print() { /* ... */ }
}

// A standard user class that implements the interface. Typically this is the
// reason for MI since often you would just go with a standard impl for the
// interfaced code. Actually common with containers (*).
class Document implements Printable {
delegate Printable $print;
function __construct() {
$this->print = new PrintHandler($this);
}

// No need to provide function print here - actually doing so is an error
// since tit's body is automatically generated as a call to the delegate:
// function print() {
// if (!$this->print) throw new Exception("Delegate must not be NULL");
// $this->print->print();
// }
}

On the one hand this raises the complexity and syntax magic. On the other
way it is really elegant and promotes code-reuse which is otherwise a pain
with interfaces.

(*) Actually the most prominent case is a general Container and a base class
in a GUI Framwork. There the desktop and the windows need containers too. So
you'd habe an interface to access the container and implement it againa and
again...even though you already have it. And if you find a mistake - nobody
tells you whether you fixed all incarnations of the code.

Best regards,
Marcus

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

I am PHP programmer since a time and I wish php to be more closed to a
serious language. I am annoyed by a lot of things in PHP. For example
in the following code:

<?php
while($ch !=3D EOF) $thestring .=3D $ch;
print $thestring;
?>

I ask you why $thestring is available outside of the while loop. I
don't want to be boring but php have serious problems like
no-namespaces. It gives headaches to any C programmer. It is PHP
created for designers with no programming knowledge or for real
programmers. Why not let the graphical webmasters to use other SSI
like Escapade (just kiding).

Please read : Why PHP sucks (for large systems) Edwin Martin
<edwin@bitstorm.org>, PHP Annoyances, I hate PHP, Experiences of Using
PHP in Large Websites, Aaron Crane <aaron.crane@gbdirect.co.uk>

It is PHP created for average programmers or by average programmers. I
don't think so ...maybe it is just oversimplification that leads to
excessive complexity ... just saying...

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

OF>>don't want to be boring but php have serious problems like
OF>>no-namespaces. It gives headaches to any C programmer. It is PHP

Because PHP is not C, neither it is Java, Perl, Python, C++, ML,
Smalltalk, Lisp, Javascript, Z80 assembler or any other language one was
trained into. So to expect that any syntax construct and any pattern you
were used to in your favorite language would automatically appear in PHP
is a mistake.

OF>>Please read : Why PHP sucks (for large systems) Edwin Martin
OF>><edwin@bitstorm.org>, PHP Annoyances, I hate PHP, Experiences of Using
OF>>PHP in Large Websites, Aaron Crane <aaron.crane@gbdirect.co.uk>

Most of it either "my favorite feature X is not there" or "this particular
function module doesn't have option X which I need" or "my favorite
product is not free". While the first can change and the second may be
valid point for specific module developer, it has no relation to PHP being
inadequate in general. That's like saying "American cars suck" because
they have gear shifting done differently from european ones.

Again, I think any feedback (including, and even probably most of all -
"sucks" articles) is valuable and provides food for thought, but it
doesn't mean that if you are used to particular feature of particular
language, like block scoping in C or pointers or <> construct in Perl, it
automatically should be in PHP. IMHO, good language can not be built on
kitchen-sink principles. PHP has one set of features, $Perl (replace with
your favorite language here) has another. Choose what is best to fit your task.

OF>>It is PHP created for average programmers or by average programmers. I

Well, I'd propose you to leave alone the "by" part - I think discussing
qualities of PHP builders is not your purpose and definitely is not mine -
but for the "for" part the answer is definitely "yes" - PHP is the
language that one can use even if he's not used to read machine code as
a lunch-time amusement and has troubles understanding what latest
Obfuscated C contest winner code actually does. It is suitable (and reasonably
easy) for consumption by average person - and I see nothing wrong with it.

--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer
stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.115

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Hi:

It would be nice if PHP could not get tripped up by "<?xml" tags when
short_tags is on.

http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=25987

--Dan

--
T H E A N A L Y S I S A N D S O L U T I O N S C O M P A N Y
data intensive web and database programming
http://www.AnalysisAndSolutions.com/
4015 7th Ave #4, Brooklyn NY 11232 v: 718-854-0335 f: 718-854-0409

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Already included, you may have seen this feature used before, <?php :-)

Ilia


--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php