On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:51 AM Arnold Daniels <
arnold.adaniels...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Comments:
>
> I don't like how it works for anonymous classes. It's more difficult to
> implement since the compiler doesn't know the meaning of the (first)
> bracket. It's doesn't make the code more readable, for the same reason. I
> think it's better to not support this syntax with anonymous classes.
>
> The examples do not show how constructor arguments are passed. I'm assuming
> it's
>
> $customer = new Customer("foo") {
> name = "John"
> };
>
> About the idea of letting `{ foo = 10 }` create an `stdClass` object (not
> in the RFC); While not used much since it has no effect, it's perfectly
> okay to put your code in brackets eg `{ { { $foo = 10; } } }`. As such, I
> don't think it's a good idea to allow `new stdClass` to be omitted.
>
If the compiler implementation of `$foo = {...};` would give issues, `$foo
= new {...};` could be an alternative for run-time declared anonymous
classes (preferably with typed properties). In regards of stdClass, I don't
think this should be used.
Regards,
Lynn van der Berg
