Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:115296
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAF+90c9kZMwjUupnCJ+Ak3SKtQSC3Mb3GTcVJWUfYG6BDkbKPA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c9kZMwjUupnCJ+Ak3SKtQSC3Mb3GTcVJWUfYG6BDkbKPA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2021 13:55:52 +0200
Message-ID: <CACwt+JcnWkuQdxZqYfP4kbpAJ4iuuUbgJ_ixJ_Vp8ar_5AqOKQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005cc34105c65efddf"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Readonly properties
From: patrickallaert@php.net (Patrick ALLAERT)

--0000000000005cc34105c65efddf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Le jeu. 1 juil. 2021 =C3=A0 12:23, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> a =
=C3=A9crit :

> Hi internals,
>
> I have opened voting on https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_properties_v2.
> The vote closes 2021-07-15.
>
> See https://externals.io/message/114729 for the discussion thread on this
> proposal. I think a decent tl;dr is that readonly properties as proposed =
do
> not play well with clone-based withers, so some people believe we should
> either improve cloning first, or introduce asymmetric property visibility
> instead, which does not suffer from this issue.
>
> Regards,
> Nikita
>

With the proposed implementation  the following class:

class A {
    public readonly string $name;

    public function __construct(string $name) {
        $this->setName($name);
    }

    public function setName(string $name) {
        $this->name =3D $name;
    }

    public function setName2(string $name) {
        $this->setName($name);
    }

    public function setName3(string $name) {
        $this->name =3D $name;
    }
}

Would behave like this:

$a =3D new A("Initial name");
echo $a->name, "\n"; // echoes Initial name

$a->setName("New name"); // Allowed ?
echo $a->name, "\n"; // echoes New name

$a->setName2("Yet another name"); // Allowed ?
echo $a->name, "\n"; // echoes Yet another name

$a->setName3("Yet another name"); // Not allowed, although identical to
setName()?

I find the word "scope" very confusing to understand in:

> A readonly property can only be initialized once, and only from the scope
> where it has been declared. Any other assignment or modification of the
> property will result in an Error exception.


Is the above behaviour an implementation bug or does the RFC implies that?

Regards,
Patrick

--0000000000005cc34105c65efddf--