Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:109476
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAJmjfvW8b=jYTjLfW9N9FT_eQVS7RBe768NZXv-g4V2RM3OgtA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJmjfvUcONYKvRKvAXB8x5n3faRwxntbg5q25Nan2aZrSNznXQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <ab89d411-c699-b80b-4cfe-7338cdae6c42@gmail.com> <CAJmjfvX_qjLwUByeuyENjY133v-vRDHqCmfxto9evu1ktXVgaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <a261d1f4-8cc2-4eab-8afe-9bc21daaa637@www.fastmail.com> <CAJmjfvU8-23r=cdcdVLoTwLpWuoFbG9C1i1KL1Y_u=nsZRtygA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJmjfvU8-23r=cdcdVLoTwLpWuoFbG9C1i1KL1Y_u=nsZRtygA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:07:48 +0200
Message-ID: <CANS-=pesfT0OkfCeKORNhdbzNvBg+FcEvEpRXJ7U6wNzVCThBw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jakob Givoni <jakob@givoni.dk>
Cc: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>, php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000039ed9c05a2213bd5"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Compact Object Property Assignment
From: kjarli@gmail.com (Lynn)

--00000000000039ed9c05a2213bd5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi,

> In this case, the problem with COPA as proposed is that it only works for
> public properties that are assigned literally.  That is, in my experience,
> a very rare case.
>
> You see, here's the funny thing: It's rare because it's a hassle!
> *MY* experience (I do have some 20 years' worth of such...) is that
> people tend to use associative arrays instead for data records and the
> like. COPA aims to change that.


COPA won't make me use objects instead of arrays (in legacy code). The
problem is writing a ton of classes for all array ever used, in a legacy
file structure that comes with more maintenance than you'd like. What would
make me use objects would probably be run-time interfaces via a return
contract in combination with anonymous classes.


> > Most objects want and need to have private or protected properties for a
> large variety of reasons, which would make COPA useless.
>
> Ooops, careful with such an overstatement, buddy! I don't want to
> enter into this debate here, just point out that this generalisation
> is overreaching.
>

I don't remember when the last time was that I used public properties, even
for the simplest data objects. Constructors provide all the features I need
at this point, and I'm much more interested in making constructors have
less boilerplate than their initialization. I can imagine COPA being more
attractive once (public) read only properties are a thing, though even then
I'd much rather use a constructor as it will let me find usages and
add/swap arguments easily. Finding COPA usages of a class will be a lot
harder compared to constructors.

Regards,
Lynn

--00000000000039ed9c05a2213bd5--