Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:110655
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
In-Reply-To: <CANeKSiTAYFOUvA+V+Ytb=N91OPMv_iuJ1m6iFq2kPE80Qp0QJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 15:06:01 +0200
Cc: PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID:
 <VI1PR02MB4703313585C4A88D85068462E29B0@VI1PR02MB4703.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CANeKSiTAYFOUvA+V+Ytb=N91OPMv_iuJ1m6iFq2kPE80Qp0QJw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benas IML <benas.molis.iml@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1
Received: from [IPv6:2001:7e8:cb71:d400:acbd:faf1:907b:7654] (2001:7e8:cb71:d400:acbd:faf1:907b:7654) by PR0P264CA0175.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:100:1c::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3109.22 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:06:03 +0000
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-Microsoft-Original-Message-ID:
 <CFC16B21-F079-4494-B581-3686E2BF162A@hotmail.com>
X-TMN: [4Iz9xUl0950Q9ajgyBB6+2AHnMxn8VPF9KMqCx08NcNYtjppYOXuNpXMPVOwTQbO]
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-IncomingHeaderCount: 49
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 7abf19a7-965b-47ee-e581-08d813885ae4
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: AM6EUR05HT123:
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
	jZpz2CzCMa5y8pSMKfFzVNu17IUHI26sZGe17VFzYCC+ji8AKyKMnaSehLbP7TAg6cyl0lsg4mGjkyEWnYric7hD/hss+0ZzypKl7VZSUjGYoGvHNL2abe1J0bKei6APlApmVGz1/2SsBqVj/AjIn3gCaErGpYOr2iR2/XLW7mKfXLu9erq1H33T3BQ46uq2acgquxK8cBuZyZTQHaDkV6PfG0bKYFMf5j5LFid6rtvxey0XF7LoTt+Zpm23cj4R
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report:
	CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:0;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:VI1PR02MB4703.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFTY:;SFS:;DIR:OUT;SFP:1901;
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData:
	DNqpGMdrUjs2sPetKtIy3KmODBwWd8+F1qi0eL1bwVYrfQIki3wqO+2HjG4F0HL67ERD6c+200735x49xoxrb67icSih2lk4Efzg72W0gX4rIb/DN3gZhtUCgeKEZOhkplAc96txvT6L3aQorR6gGBDd9ZTTt7nGpZhtYMSt3SXBT/Tk82LlwBHewEUrbbDm2fF04Fjs/UxcAWRMtvl2bA==
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7abf19a7-965b-47ee-e581-08d813885ae4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jun 2020 13:06:03.9342
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg:
	00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM6EUR05HT123
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Make constructors and destructors
 return void
From: bobwei9@hotmail.com (Bob Weinand)

> Am 17.06.2020 um 01:10 schrieb Benas IML <benas.molis.iml@gmail.com>:
>=20
> Hey internals,
>=20
> This is a completely refined, follow-up RFC to my original RFC. Based on =
the
> feedback I have received, this PR implements full validation and implicit=
ly
> enforces `void` rules on constructors/destructors while also allowing to
> declare an **optional** explicit `void` return type. Note, that there is =
a
> small but justifiable BC break (as stated by the RFC).
>=20
> RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/make_ctor_ret_void
>=20
> Best regards,
> Benas Seliuginas

Hey Benas,

I do not see any particular benefit from that RFC.

Regarding what the manual states - the manual is wrong there and thus shoul=
d be fixed in the manual. This is not an argument for changing engine behav=
iour.

Sometimes a constructor (esp. of a parent class) or destructor may be calle=
d manually. Sometimes you have valid information to pass from the parent cl=
ass.
With your RFC an arbitrary restriction is introduced necessitating an extra=
 method instead.

In general that RFC feels like "uh, __construct and __destruct are mostly v=
oid, so let's enforce it =E2=80=A6 because we can"?

On these grounds and it being an additional (albeit mostly small) unnecessa=
ry BC break, I'm not in favor of that RFC.

Bob=