Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114732
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAF+90c-W_g9Mt9yMNzBWfMEmQP287a7A6S75RyZo2fvUO2uGXQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c-W_g9Mt9yMNzBWfMEmQP287a7A6S75RyZo2fvUO2uGXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 14:43:44 -0400
Message-ID: <CAKuGYLRVh2wCCU44XHK-4s91bOJfcvAujR030ZMbme7zFH=LGA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f3879b05c3f51293"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Readonly properties
From: matthewmatthew@gmail.com (Matthew Brown)

--000000000000f3879b05c3f51293
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

This is a great idea!

Might be worth mentioning that Psalm already supports a `@readonly`
docblock annotation (first suggested by Nuno Maduro), and it matches the
proposed behaviour (though Psalm doesn't currently prevent inheritance
issues):

Example: https://psalm.dev/r/7ed5872738

On Fri, 4 Jun 2021 at 11:19, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi internals,
>
> I'd like to open the discussion on readonly properties:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_properties_v2
>
> This proposal is similar to the
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/write_once_properties RFC that has been declined
> previously. One significant difference is that the new RFC limits the scope
> of initializing assignments. I think a key mistake of the previous RFC was
> the confusing "write-once" framing, which is both technically correct and
> quite irrelevant.
>
> Please see the rationale section (
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_properties_v2#rationale) for how this
> proposal relates to other RFCs and alternatives.
>
> Regards,
> Nikita
>

--000000000000f3879b05c3f51293--