Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115171
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAF+90c-W_g9Mt9yMNzBWfMEmQP287a7A6S75RyZo2fvUO2uGXQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c-W_g9Mt9yMNzBWfMEmQP287a7A6S75RyZo2fvUO2uGXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 14:59:07 +0200
Message-ID: <CAF+90c8eE_J-ntY=E8rtusAzh_6mJUKRmYhtunyAV2dPK7LN5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000005e4a505c5d30f5d"
Subject: Re: [RFC] Readonly properties
From: nikita.ppv@gmail.com (Nikita Popov)

--00000000000005e4a505c5d30f5d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 5:19 PM 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.
>

I plan to open voting on this RFC soon. I don't think there's anything
technical left to address here, the discussion mostly comes down to a value
judgement. I think everyone has made their position regarding that clear...

Regards,
Nikita

--00000000000005e4a505c5d30f5d--