Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114325
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1620635361.9147.0@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1620635361.9147.0@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 10:31:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CADyq6s+CMbj2YYs7MUXXCKc1iAQJQFA4HPC6bH_qa-XwG5FQKQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Mat=C4=ABss_Treinis?= <mrtreinis@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000006721b05c1f59c6b"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Draft] Body-less __construct
From: ocramius@gmail.com (Marco Pivetta)

--00000000000006721b05c1f59c6b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hey Mat=C4=ABss,

This already works by replacing `;` with `{}`: https://3v4l.org/tN4HM

Is the change in AST really necessary, considering that?

Marco Pivetta

http://twitter.com/Ocramius

http://ocramius.github.com/


On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 10:29 AM Mat=C4=ABss Treinis <mrtreinis@gmail.com> =
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Since constructor property promotion is now implemented, and it looks
> like it could become a widely used feature, I am proposing a small,
> cosmetic change in syntax for constructors in concrete classes to do
> away with empty constructor body.
>
> Here's an example of how this would work:
>
> <?php
> namespace App;
>
> class Foo {
>     public function __construct(
>         private Bar $bar,
>         private Baz $baz
>     );
> }
>
> Some notes to this:
>
> - Since this is similar to already existing syntax for body-less
> methods, parser should not be affected that much. I hope. I really have
> no idea.
> - Syntax would be optional - meaning, you can as well continue using
> empty body, just that in this case the body would be implied empty.
>
> Thoughts?
> Regards,
> - Mat=C4=ABss
>
>

--00000000000006721b05c1f59c6b--