On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 16:33:08 +0200, Alexander Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 20 June 2008, Larry Garfield wrote: >> > function ($x, $y) use ($a, $b, &$c) {}; >> >> I am not sure if "use" is the clearest word to use there (wouldn't > lexical >> there make more sense?) > > I agree. "use" for both namespaces and closures may not be a good idea. > Otherwise +1 to this syntax for its low WTF-factor. > Look like parameters. Behave like parameters. > > Also, allowing this for regular function definitions might be a nice > long-term > replacement for global.
Totally silly idea: function foo($a, $b, &$c) global ($d, &$e) { // ... } $myfunc = lambda($a, $b, &$c) lexical ($d, &$e) { // ... } That puts all the information in the declaration line with parallel syntax and semantics, and would even allow both by-val and by-ref usage for both lexical and global values. The following would then be exactly equivalent functionality-wise: function foo() global (&$a) { // ... } function foo() { global $a; // ... } Is that too crazy an idea? --Larry Garfield -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php