Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:109955
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAPNm5sMWF=XOe-H_erfSm0jPerAxKGnXENetbbH+BUZDi+yiiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <647703CF-1015-4FBF-868F-8E3525706A43@benramsey.com>
In-Reply-To: <647703CF-1015-4FBF-868F-8E3525706A43@benramsey.com>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 18:26:24 +0300
Message-ID: <CAPNm5sMxWGKH=24RMybuFaDTYTYY0We0=1fs+zN=Cny-syUdBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ben Ramsey <ben@benramsey.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009a288305a497ce89"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Simplify classes syntax proposal
From: max@bukrek.net (Max D)

--0000000000009a288305a497ce89
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thank you for the replies!

Take note, that this directive is optional, so it will be used by
programmers that would like this coding style.
Of course, it will make code reading more challenging. But, from the other
side, code will look more clean and human like, making understanding the
logic easier.
Now it looks like some core dumps, especially with *self::* prefixes.
Without syntax highlighting it's barely readable.

Just to mention, C++ and Pascal have such simple referring scheme without
alternatives.
Millions of programmers write and read such code from the beginning of
classes up to now.

With best regards,
MaxD


=D0=BF=D1=82, 1 =D1=82=D1=80=D0=B0=D0=B2. 2020 =D0=BE 18:02 Ben Ramsey <ben=
@benramsey.com> =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5:

> > On May 1, 2020, at 09:44, Max D <max@bukrek.net> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings, Internals!
> >
> > This is my first try to input the proposal, please don't be strict )
> >
> > All the years with PHP I hate writing classes. The need to prefix EVERY
> > property and method use looks horrible and writes horrible. So, the
> > proposal:
> >
> > Lets introduce directive
> > declare(simple_classes=3D1);
> >
> > This directive will switch interpreter mode, where class declared
> > properties and methods are accessible as regular variables and function=
s
> at
> > class code.
> >
> > So, such a fragment
> >
> > public function __construct() {
> >   $this->get =3D $this->clean($_GET);
> >   $this->post =3D $this->clean($_POST);
> >   $this->request =3D $this->clean($_REQUEST);
> >   $this->cookie =3D $this->clean($_COOKIE);
> >   $this->files =3D $this->clean($_FILES);
> >   $this->server =3D $this->clean($_SERVER);
> > }
> >
> > will look so with the proposed directive:
> >
> > public function __construct() {
> >   $get =3D clean($_GET);
> >   $post =3D clean($_POST);
> >   $request =3D clean($_REQUEST);
> >   $cookie =3D clean($_COOKIE);
> >   $files =3D clean($_FILES);
> >   $server =3D clean($_SERVER);
> > }
> >
> > What do we lose with such an approach? The ability to use local variabl=
es
> > named as class properties and the ability to call regular functions,
> called
> > as class methods. Both things are super-rarely used and programmers hav=
e
> > the ability to change naming to achieve them.
> >
> > For static properties/methods, dynamic ones will have an advantage if
> > naming matches.
> > Of course, the ability to use usual prefixes will be preserved.
> >
> > I'm not going to implement this, hoping someone will volunteer if the
> > reaction is positive.
> > Also I have some more proposals I will post if this one goes nice.
> >
> > With best regards,
> > MaxD
>
>
> Hi, MaxD!
>
> Is there a particular problem you=E2=80=99re trying to solve with this pr=
oposal?
> You say, =E2=80=9CAll the years with PHP I hate writing classes. The need=
 to prefix
> EVERY property and method use looks horrible and writes horrible.=E2=80=
=9D
>
> I=E2=80=99m generally in favor of changes that make it easier for develop=
ers to do
> their jobs well, but I don=E2=80=99t think writing `$this->` in front of =
property
> and method names is a detriment to the development process. In fact, I
> think it aids in writing safe code. Without `$this->`, it=E2=80=99s possi=
ble to
> unknowingly use or overwrite a class property, when that is not the inten=
t.
> I think this leads to a poor developer experience, so I would be against
> this change.
>
> Cheers,
> Ben
>
>
>
>

--0000000000009a288305a497ce89--