Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:110262
Return-Path: <ocramius@gmail.com>
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 19688 invoked from network); 22 May 2020 21:39:49 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5)
by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 22 May 2020 21:39:49 -0000
Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88AF9180509
for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS
autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17
X-Spam-Virus: No
X-Envelope-From: <ocramius@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-il1-f181.google.com (mail-il1-f181.google.com [209.85.166.181])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS
for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-f181.google.com with SMTP id l20so11875387ilj.10
for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc;
bh=rjiG29D+IhLdNerbAZz7F16QL1p3wTcmhwEnHfDQpS0=;
b=AmD8FnfTTFICubtdAHrNUEccZi/GCRZ6DICqfQvCw4qA9aj4Y7uhN/8pS7D0gzwVFO
OYlEwOa06DApnNwT05z+KMvODdT5Q8s7FcAkIOQirnJUL9rEb7RX6RSl/yXtAK9911Vv
vY3Qq+hZfoXdKD0mKUqyr0hov7UrjBmpYbYg5hTRfTpd7xxfV7nBvDEeMZlJbAwgtyNx
yiax2cqflqzaeEsojEIEdWOJjShi4ZNE5i27D/HHQh8H5I5ssHZ+6wyBcB4asZo6OY6s
9n7dRSe7eRlk/b0Ez6eWJetPj6ntqLq34s1Jc8ebHagW082GaMEdzRjhA0phUPUW+0NX
nonQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=rjiG29D+IhLdNerbAZz7F16QL1p3wTcmhwEnHfDQpS0=;
b=O38QR0zL9cuoIUr4J7oGJXvgo9K6J36Ya7yaVC8JmHjakCcM6ZdeeyzNv+UO5vSmWN
9lIRz8BkOdXGv8PN8gF0MT61XQuGfjKPiw5415U5yHwlAzy1bulVe+CSC2TPCpslw/xu
vnQrc3xoh03kNKfraOHDzLuHRpwK9SiHLXErpA8T7sexSxvXaU3YYmbl14J75cqUtr3D
DzuTlTSfzorP69M6rChWsReZiIUrat4yT5Scl+4x6LpvQxKEN0yL8S0vB3DkeJEe8e/g
rxUT57ZgaL+5LaMtVz3NxCRwrQxbUu8q+t5e4WZy0qbVjLLz5leeHACzLlW9NK2m2co+
9/Bg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Lx+EHVNtAj5mQIg8xOOtxYZQnCr2eMcounpRCoIEmbqC62T6o
UKqZjQFl4YnvT1gm8xIY5V+N4CAoc9vo4zjAwYs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwHx8AXVaPCBXNf+CF4tmuMplfZGmTRxk01rpkTmQmNAn89dNoo/639ADqNlHhKplJb2pxWo0H8HBPWXU4I1VM=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:9f4e:: with SMTP id u75mr14270911ili.282.1590178744683;
Fri, 22 May 2020 13:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAJd4=YZd3Mh8sQjYxE-YfNim-CN1+j8oST2W+nykXDynC_KQiA@mail.gmail.com>
<CADyq6sKn7ERUTmHfOSt6bOeWvFiS33ciaK7WZuLgktCs7AN3zg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+hqhpeSAMK6nyig+J69s8=OsGWusyVjOPX=i+wQ+6oz=vtcxQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+hqhpeSAMK6nyig+J69s8=OsGWusyVjOPX=i+wQ+6oz=vtcxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 22:18:52 +0200
Message-ID: <CADyq6sJ1gF+nKWKEUkdVfrAuxagiiXJJ-Dv64i3piZ7Ze3O5Jg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bruce Weirdan <weirdan@gmail.com>
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Pedro_Magalh=C3=A3es?= <mail@pmmaga.net>,
PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000034d79005a64257bb"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Remove inappropriate inheritance
signature checks on private methods
From: ocramius@gmail.com (Marco Pivetta)
--00000000000034d79005a64257bb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hey Bruce,
On Fri, May 22, 2020, 22:07 Bruce Weirdan <weirdan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 7:26 PM Marco Pivetta <ocramius@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Overall, this RFC breaks some design capabilities that are within the
>> language, specifically around `__`-prefixed methods in the language.
>
>
> Wouldn't your use cases be covered by `protected final` though, as
> proposed by Pedro?
>
This design is made appositely to prevent the child class from being able
to call the constructor: the only viable constructors are the named
constructors on the supertype
>
--00000000000034d79005a64257bb--