Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114400
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1620635361.9147.0@gmail.com> <CAC5V6ghaP0BswUjEE67bUojybszfU8w74Cc26ekTG1+5G31TxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPKYkKwa6hRR1_7ndaEE0otk7ccE8m0td6_uYzgxpm2ye8VN1A@mail.gmail.com>
 <973730f8-1c9c-4208-b1fa-5f1048f6d6cf@www.fastmail.com> <1ebf8a93-b116-f941-151b-893ddcad72e4@processus.org>
In-Reply-To: <1ebf8a93-b116-f941-151b-893ddcad72e4@processus.org>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 17:35:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CAC5V6gg2zf-X9=jJkL_a9f0PPpgEV=9_mOU_cRTH4piw994f8Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierre <pierre-php@processus.org>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ee57d605c20fa6bc"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Draft] Body-less __construct
From: guilliam.xavier@gmail.com (Guilliam Xavier)

--000000000000ee57d605c20fa6bc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 5:07 PM Pierre <pierre-php@processus.org> wrote:

> Le 10/05/2021 =C3=A0 18:58, Larry Garfield a =C3=A9crit :
>
> > I agree that in the grand scheme of things this would be a minor matter=
,
> but aesthetically I would prefer it as well.  The {} annoys me, CS tools =
or
> no.
> >
> > Related: I feel the same way about empty-classes and interfaces, which
> is often the case for exceptions where all you're doing is declaring a
> type.  I figure that would get even more pushback, though. :-)
> >
> > As a data point, you can already do the same "semi-colon for no body"
> for foreach, for, and while loops.  I've only ever done it on foreach to
> runout an iterator, but it works on all three today.
> >
> > --Larry Garfield
>
> I didn't saw this answer at first, but I agree that:
>
> ```
>
> interface MyLibraryException;
>
>
> class DefaultMyLibraryException extends \RuntimeException implements
> MyLibraryException;
>
> ```
>
> Is an excellent use case for this!
>
>
I'm probably biased by my C++ background but to me this looks like "forward
declarations" (i.e. just declares types but doesn't *define* them) :/

Regards,

--=20
Guilliam Xavier

--000000000000ee57d605c20fa6bc--