Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114688
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <DM6PR07MB6618CDD907E7381678151FEDF93E9@DM6PR07MB6618.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR07MB6618CDD907E7381678151FEDF93E9@DM6PR07MB6618.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 09:40:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CAF+90c8JqT2f=S5yzvfJUUs3pjkZ0DmeiBqq_0QuBTq_xxAeJQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: tyson andre <tysonandre775@hotmail.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004569e605c3c395fd"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Allow static properties in enums
From: nikita.ppv@gmail.com (Nikita Popov)

--0000000000004569e605c3c395fd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 3:25 PM tyson andre <tysonandre775@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi internals,
>
> I have opened the vote on
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/enum_allow_static_properties
> Voting ends on June 15, 2021
>
> Previous discussion can be found at https://externals.io/message/114494
>
> Thanks,
> Tyson
>

I'm neutral on this one. Not a fan of static properties, certainly not a
fan of static properties on enums, but I do see the argument that the
restriction is somewhat arbitrary from a technical perspective. I guess you
can view the current baseline here in two ways: 1. Enums don't support
properties, and we don't go out of our way to support static properties in
particular, or 2. we prohibit static properties even though there is no
technical reason to do so. Considered through (1.) the limitation is not
arbitrary, just the result of a more general limitation that certainly *is*
needed.

Regards,
Nikita

--0000000000004569e605c3c395fd--