Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:114733 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 57872 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2021 08:25:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 5 Jun 2021 08:25:54 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC76F1804CC for ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 01:39:52 -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=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-ej1-f53.google.com (mail-ej1-f53.google.com [209.85.218.53]) (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 ; Sat, 5 Jun 2021 01:39:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-f53.google.com with SMTP id l1so18107157ejb.6 for ; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 01:39:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=e6rG29LlmogGY5/ysZZuyHVa7QTn6FTcqs/HzpQ8V2c=; b=JqBtCfQwpaRESTxRNW8Ozg7yqynTCk9/H+0z4e2lLvnoon5QSRSGS22L9UlS0O8wMP 6AD7BbHJM1FPsePqqiAQbDnVKbd+itoXReUnBXoOd4nmaWr99zHAIlD0e90klv4X4v0K bkYMILsftzOIzpzbEh+hTBEC+0oYKZRBQFWjyqRXbBw/MsTmBZqxlQEJHu9s9Elg8/oA E3J3M8GUseepvzZWSlBFxUOyN4i3dAyCi71wQcSvfcBzT4B2hknsitiku4jzKamUVXjU ajL48BGp7jtCZAL9D1dTy5udYcA+TOPt5vQqc6NxQKQkAtzYCyF6bpojZUinNSVFcXSN rTYw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=e6rG29LlmogGY5/ysZZuyHVa7QTn6FTcqs/HzpQ8V2c=; b=ll6mXZktk+b/ZH7mGU8eh0OiwnmqFs7/5Vwgf2GQugaUsI6ehpCYgRPLHsZlae+5Ub MBWRM1RqPYeFyl7eKIllfd1VjekGAa/3il/1qdt9ehJz0U27eMy8oonJhIpXeU/QHUuJ Ix/xaNY8OE9QOQ9dp87xSUDu/ayNvOZJsVQhPf8riomhpqJIQ/PExlA2hDi6ST5FOsJI ++mAOw9n5CuKs8Py81GAiwYRlloIlM0fZUnYHpIZXp5rerzqakaIjFMmBr81VAx4stZD KZis6ZqUCK+TsOLiePkMRPG46DR6wvVGVsUfFk2JTIXf4qYplqueaTv4q2ucm+hkf9ir 701g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533EIGSTYzc7yJGcnkxQiK8URtSVakm7KoXQbu7QpmBtS8DmcAxh 0NWkrxnfuxt7tVajK2V9ii5/yTd2e0n6Eof7zPU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxvcqvzOD+b/mvqGgI0p8FarJMmvvlSUT5YinKQx5diQ/ky2IHYCBsCMqC+m70in0lGcqpjPjMzBmxaAvJPSWA= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:b09:: with SMTP id h9mr7921215ejl.430.1622882389985; Sat, 05 Jun 2021 01:39:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2021 10:39:37 +0200 Message-ID: To: Nikita Popov Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005e0d0105c400c030" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Readonly properties From: nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com (Nicolas Grekas) --0000000000005e0d0105c400c030 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Nikita, Le ven. 4 juin 2021 =C3=A0 17:19, Nikita Popov a =C3= =A9crit : > Hi internals, > > I'd like to open the discussion on readonly properties: > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_properties_v2 > Thanks for the proposal, that's quite appealing! I voted "no" on the previous proposal because it didn't play well with cloning. That's why I favoured asymmetric visibility. I see that this new iteration has the same issue, so I'd like to know: What about putting readonly properties in the uninitialized state when cloning objects? Cheers, Nicolas --0000000000005e0d0105c400c030--