Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:122915
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------0eSujwPUgpQSEZG6s6fwNp3Q"
Message-ID: <594919c9-de36-4136-ad3e-27a75b0467b8@redmagic.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 20:19:44 +0100
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Support object type in BCMath
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <4F094EDA-5058-407D-AF39-06FD934FDE1F@sakiot.com>
 <bbcff629-4dd6-bc50-ac9f-641849dc218a@php.net>
 <68CF373E-6ABF-4471-8992-813B4BA1B508@sakiot.com>
 <904197f4-afb5-401e-9e17-7a655c5449d0@alec.pl>
 <CAMrTa2EK6ymBQuxeFj7tMV0M2crqCCCR=mLN-FSfuCgrQHEZ6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <AB663F3F-A888-45F7-B19A-00530A4EDB0C@sakiot.com>
 <CAMrTa2HOEUWQcPdZE3FZ9JWCS1DWuRTNhhfqGGZOmr=v1Mctdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANS-=pfVuKKfAiu0LUJTrEPnSRaa_nHwJCgMvSORruAwHMsvQg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMrTa2HXD+62TKbaaA-v-mct5zdR5ortUAbtG1R1D22amAgpNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMrTa2GaK3AUp0WodhNO8RdvoLbbiCk14Gs2oWF6vEs_+qMYNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <655FEA80-9AB4-4AAD-A310-70ED968C97A2@sakiot.com>
 <CAMrTa2Fh_-M_Kezi7s_4P4+a+dTyKq=RExd6ARPRDqZYS175kA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMrTa2FrkvNPK6kETNJFNNDn0mL5dxkV=PmdxsysruhhjY=Uig@mail.gmail.com>
 <8FB87901-02D7-4934-9119-55B21CEDDA9D@sakiot.com>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <8FB87901-02D7-4934-9119-55B21CEDDA9D@sakiot.com>
From: barney@redmagic.org.uk (Barney Laurance)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------0eSujwPUgpQSEZG6s6fwNp3Q
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 03/04/2024 01:42, Saki Takamachi wrote:
> If make a class final, users will not be able to add arbitrary methods, so I think making each method final.


Right, if a class is not final but has only final methods (including 
constructor) and no protected properties then it allows people to extend 
it but not break any encapsulation or (I think) impose any more BC 
requirements on the maintainer (unless we care about conflicting with 
method names of child classes when updating). It lets people just do 
something a bit like adding 'extension methods' in C#. I like it. People 
could write e.g. `$bcChildNumber->isPrime()` instead of 
`BcNumberUtils::isPrime($bcNumber)`

--------------0eSujwPUgpQSEZG6s6fwNp3Q
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/04/2024 01:42, Saki Takamachi
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:8FB87901-02D7-4934-9119-55B21CEDDA9D@sakiot.com">
      <pre>If make a class final, users will not be able to add arbitrary methods, so I think making each method final.
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <p>Right, if a class is not final but has only final methods
      (including constructor) and no protected properties then it allows
      people to extend it but not break any encapsulation or (I think)
      impose any more BC requirements on the maintainer (unless we care
      about conflicting with method names of child classes when
      updating). It lets people just do something a bit like adding
      'extension methods' in C#. I like it. People could write e.g.
      `$bcChildNumber-&gt;isPrime()` instead of `BcNumberUtils::isPrime($bcNumber)`</p>
  </body>
</html>

--------------0eSujwPUgpQSEZG6s6fwNp3Q--