Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114176 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 5165 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2021 07:18:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2021 07:18:06 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5C8B1804DC for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 00:22:04 -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=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from processus.org (ns366368.ip-94-23-14.eu [94.23.14.201]) (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 ; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 00:22:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from authenticated-user (PRIMARY_HOSTNAME [PUBLIC_IP]) by processus.org (Postfix) with ESMTPA id DA5BA5101324 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 07:22:01 +0000 (UTC) To: internals@lists.php.net References: <5b9f1500-615a-48f1-815f-1d48b327ef90@processus.org> <179049b1475.11134368b213512.254739612773841999@void.tn> <0BF84585-DDC3-4B25-BFD2-D8B916D135EE@newclarity.net> Message-ID: <015f6acb-eece-93c4-fd0e-0b54acd7170e@processus.org> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 09:22:00 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Authentication-Results: processus.org; auth=pass smtp.auth=pierre-php@processus.org smtp.mailfrom=pierre-php@processus.org X-Spamd-Bar: / Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Draft] Sealed Classes From: pierre-php@processus.org (Pierre) Le 25/04/2021 à 21:22, Larry Garfield a écrit : > Stitching together 2 replies to minimize thread noise... > > On Sun, Apr 25, 2021, at 11:58 AM, Michał Marcin Brzuchalski wrote: > >> Speaking of Attributes I prefer not to use an Attribute for any particular >> language feature which expects input arguments to be a valid class or >> interface name for two reasons: first because there is no effective way to >> restrict input string to be a valid class or interface name and second that >> it'd require passing strings which means in most cases passing class or >> interface name with magic ::class constant read. >> >> Cheers, >> Michał Marcin Brzuchalski > That's actually a pretty solid argument against attributes here, honestly. Consider me convinced, and now in favor of "final class Foo permits Bar, Baz". :-) > Yes, even though I was the first mail suggesting it in the beginning, this is a solid argument which actually do change my mind. In the end, I like the `class Foo permis Bar, Baz` syntax, with a single keyword added. -- Pierre