Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:103222
To: Rasmus Schultz <rasmus@mindplay.dk>, lester@lsces.co.uk
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <AM0PR0702MB3684F2B7EFF1826F515BA940E2040@AM0PR0702MB3684.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
 <CALKiJKqgM=YsyqodP-4QNL52q8L05ZZxUD8iyGk9L+O9c9m1+w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NoxeswyFYp4xMegrA5wLGTtxettWgMpL2a4L_-F_7cXgg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALKiJKrL8cXAJaNTNk5o7Je7X4g1TcKc8fYj1R86Skcu0rNXsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_i4=J8wb3tMz880PfSOh1-BdM_NBYRbxN0bOkhY3bsLmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NoZ2L9uvCf2sg6Hbf_aF4g_nkvSUA2A9+eG9NpgRZjyhQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_g8-ARgCChoeze82T8xQHCzjWPzUHsxFV807DyVz4LPPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFMT4NpD6b8ihe-fa=wyn2c74iNBQWCApnZxyZWH6u32TL0O2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADqTB_gGj0uP5C_UvkEeC061tFQkAKug1OFbeoCkq=TK_aMo1g@mail.gmail.com>
 <fcfeac2f-3fda-5d1c-7e2b-01f10df94e05@lsces.co.uk>
 <CADqTB_h4tuyyY-RUX+2+TjybB0LF8=kkkZRfM-JhaVUh+cLxXA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <89971952-8ee1-4f16-b821-cb0de71e0eb7@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:54:54 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADqTB_h4tuyyY-RUX+2+TjybB0LF8=kkkZRfM-JhaVUh+cLxXA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: de-DE
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Typed properties v2
From: cmbecker69@gmx.de ("Christoph M. Becker")

On 21.09.2018 at 17:25, Rasmus Schultz wrote:

> this doesn't provide *any* additional guarantees:
> 
> class Foo {
>     public int $bar;
> }
> 
> $foo = new Foo(); // invalid state allowed
> 
> $foo->bar = 123; // valid state
> 
> $foo->bar = null; // invalid state NOT allowed?!
>
> [snip]
>
> In terms of reliability, it's actually sub-par to hand-written accessors.

You have no guarantee that a declared public property even exists
(regardless of the Typed Properties 2.0 RFC), because it might have been
unset.  And no, the property is not really NULL in this case, but rather
undefined.

-- 
Christoph M. Becker