On Mon, Apr 17, 2023, at 2:52 PM, Zoltán Fekete wrote:
>> $a = $obj->getConfig()
>> |> array_map($$->getId(), $$)
>> That is, using $$ to refer to "the value passed from the previous pipe" and
>> "make a closure whose argument is an object that we can then operate on".
>> Both of those are "obv
> I can get assistance on a better implementation than my paltry skills were
> able to manage before. (And if we can collectively make a stronger argument
> for it.)
Well sadly that definitely cannot be me. As I just started to get on
board with internal development. But I am more than excited
On Fri, Apr 14, 2023, at 5:52 AM, Zoltán Fekete wrote:
> That sure does it, but not that type safe though.
Right, which is why I'm fully on board with finding a native syntax way of
doing it. (It would be faster, to, without two extra user space function
calls.)
> The T_BLING (that is the onl
>
> I believe the fancy academic name for what we're discussing here is
> "lenses", and I agree that they'd be very useful. I currently use a
> user-space wrapper like so:
>
> function prop(string $prop): \Closure
> {
> return static fn (object $o): mixed => $o->$prop;
> }
>
> function method(
On Thu, Apr 13, 2023, at 3:04 PM, Zoltán Fekete wrote:
> Hey guys!
>
>> On 13. Apr 2023, at 16:28, Robert Landers wrote:
>>
>> I'd be down for implementing this in a heartbeat if we
>>
>> $a = Closure::fromCallable(static fn () => $this->getId());
>> $b = Closure::bindMany($items); // executes `
> I cannot really assess how big of a hassle it would be, but what I personally
> think that it look nice is something like this:
>
> ```
> class Verification
> {
> public function __construct(private string $id) {}
>
> public function getId(): string
> {
> return $this->id;
> }
>
Hey guys!
> On 13. Apr 2023, at 16:28, Robert Landers wrote:
>
> I'd be down for implementing this in a heartbeat if we
>
> $a = Closure::fromCallable(static fn () => $this->getId());
> $b = Closure::bindMany($items); // executes `bind` on each item in the
> array, returning an array of closure
On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 3:47 PM Dan Ackroyd wrote:
> I can't see a technical reason not to do it like this, but some people
> seem to be having negative gut reactions to it, and it's hard to
> persuade someone about aesthetics.
>
> Notes here: https://phpopendocs.com/rfc_codex/class_method_callabl
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 07:30, Robert Landers wrote:
>
> This has been brought up a couple of times, but I can't seem to find
> it.
https://externals.io/message/119392
https://externals.io/message/120011
> I don't think something like this is possible with the current
> implementation of first-cl
On 13 April 2023 04:59:56 BST, Eugene Sidelnyk wrote:
>It would be a great pleasure to have the ability to wrap the instance
>method the same way.
The first-class callable syntax works just fine with instance methods, but you
need to use it on a particular instance: $someInstance->someMethod(
On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 6:00 AM Eugene Sidelnyk wrote:
>
> Hello, internals! I just want to share some thoughts with you regarding
> what could be improved in the first class callable syntax.
>
> It is already possible to create Callable from a static method:
>
> ```
> class Foo {
> public static
Hello, internals! I just want to share some thoughts with you regarding
what could be improved in the first class callable syntax.
It is already possible to create Callable from a static method:
```
class Foo {
public static function staticmethod() {}
}
$c = Foo::staticmethod(...);
```
It would
12 matches
Mail list logo
