thomasalrek's avatar

Thomas Alrek

thomasalrek

Member since

60

Total Reputation

3

Total Arguments

6

Total Votes for Arguments

Arguments and votes

1

I like the idea, but I really don't like the proposed syntax. It looks like I'm reading a totally different language. I could get behind this if the syntax was prettier.

Share:
Read the RFC: The Pipe Operator thomasalrek avatar
thomasalrek
voted no
1

I like how this solves updating existing interfaces without breaking user facing code.

Share:
Read the RFC: Interface Default Methods thomasalrek avatar
thomasalrek
voted yes
1

I love this proposal. It basically makes closures up to date with other programming languages, and is sorely needed in my opinion.

Share:
Read the RFC: Short Closures 2.0 thomasalrek avatar
thomasalrek
voted yes
10

Makes code more clean because it is shorter and the use keyword is not needed anymore.

Share:
Read the RFC: Short Closures 2.0 buismaarten avatar
buismaarten
voted yes
81

We spend a lot more time reading code than writing it. The elegance of short closure combined with the convenience of variable scope usage has already shown to be a game changer on Typescript and there doesn’t seem to be any technical issue with having it on PHP.

Share:
Read the RFC: Short Closures 2.0 marco avatar
marco
voted yes
121

At least once a week, I throw away an array_map because it ended up looking too bloated and go with a classic foreach instead. Short Closures 2.0 without the use(...) block would've solved this problem, just 2 votes...

Share:
Read the RFC: Short Closures 2.0 davi avatar
davi
voted yes
RSS Feed Contribute Watch on YouTube Our License
© 2024 RFC Vote. This project is open source. Contribute and collaborate with us!