Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:112419
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2020 02:59:34 +0000 (UTC)
To: php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Message-ID: <32277b43-079d-4cd7-a159-8ad555096742@garfieldtech.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAN2symh0kEQRa+1DxRAzJHrdqmQFP2xnjKGd1wmsfU_Lv9rH=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d1c4689e-9120-4e90-837c-a1b3eac63cd6@www.fastmail.com> <CAN2symh0kEQRa+1DxRAzJHrdqmQFP2xnjKGd1wmsfU_Lv9rH=A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Enumerations
From: larry@garfieldtech.com (Larry Garfield)


Dec 4, 2020 7:37:51 PM Paul Crovella <paul.crovella@gmail.com>:

> On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 3:25 PM Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wr=
ote:
>>=20
>> Greetings, denizens of Internals!
>>=20
>> Ilija Tovilo and I have been working for the last few months on adding s=
upport for enumerations and algebraic data types to PHP.=C2=A0 This is a no=
t-small task, so we've broken it up into several stages.=C2=A0 The first st=
age, unit enumerations, are just about ready for public review and discussi=
on.
>>=20
>> The overarching plan (for context, NOT the thing to comment on right now=
) is here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/adts
>>=20
>> The first step, for unit enumerations, is here:
>>=20
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/enumerations
>>=20
>> There's still a few bits we're sorting out and the implementation is mos=
tly done, but not 100% complete.=C2=A0 Still, it's far enough along to star=
t a discussion on and get broader feedback on the outstanding nits.
>>=20
>> I should note that while the design has been collaborative, credit for t=
he implementation goes entirely to Ilija.=C2=A0 Blame for any typos in the =
RFC itself go entirely to me.
>>=20
>> *dons flame-retardant suit*
>>=20
>> --=20
>> Larry Garfield
>> larry@garfieldtech.com
>=20
> I'd like to see the specific reasons for the restrictions listed in
> Comparison to objects[1]. In general if something's value is even
> debatable then the default position should be to remain consistent
> with the rest of the language. It should take a strong argument to
> introduce any artificial limitation and it's useful to have that in
> the RFC.
>=20
> [1] https://wiki.php.net/rfc/enumerations#comparison_to_objects
>=20
The reasoning general comes down to one of 2 things:

* they involve state, and enum cases have no state. They may get reintroduc=
ed with tagged unions, but for now methods relating to state would just be =
confusing.
* we couldn't figure out what possible use they'd have (like static methods=
 on cases, which without data are exactly the same as normal methods.)

--Larry Garfield