Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:116345 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 78271 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2021 10:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 14 Nov 2021 10:54:18 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8868E1804BC for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2021 03:48:43 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-lj1-f181.google.com (mail-lj1-f181.google.com [209.85.208.181]) (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 ; Sun, 14 Nov 2021 03:48:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-f181.google.com with SMTP id v15so28953478ljc.0 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2021 03:48:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=sDmrrLpeejDxAze5CDPxUjU3DJfia7MSLF6hn50t2xk=; b=AiWT962eMn6f8m+Sx9UvLfEM/DSiJ27lYb3oeuqlzFfe3XJ1Ox++rU5HZxioTKHqiv 6mpUbIUXXPcVL9yf/2ytsebmYWgwe7PjIIJwSvz0JCLNqtG1xmIl+5289kZBkmC3gLLl HKui/axUG/kTwM3VZmucrJyKAeAK6/sYYMA2snMYVlV5vEf2+XxRw5DWRuIy+lDYtD+p Y0YwFCDvm5qBQD+ifE3z6BqheVetz51o5kVULQoF4E7L9D3s1WyF9OGpHAU9Nhj2qcet W2qDW5X1J+8sUBBggSyP4dfRRB+QTV2gRpl2PkSFiGd/5hzH44vVXMNRDQhV2v6DFJkT ir2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=sDmrrLpeejDxAze5CDPxUjU3DJfia7MSLF6hn50t2xk=; b=WOMGuW9jShlnlzOK6BkQtfHAaU9II+MSZN+r5ktUVjL65C6Hh1TzUpv+BjRo2pajou c6Ja+r1XQJ4GgrqheM1qeixQxzHq4oa7rhyOUtxqPuPBe3p82jQN9IG5PrOy88UhiWV1 oUp2w/wCvUUfltW0570NLH29VT7NADApmvvCL0FhvEQx7iXnbwnS6QGlueYoggEbJEHb Fb8qE65hdwr0kHGPAeIWYmGA/sQ10ftyF5qQuChEd6RJZ+ZczygsPCu/vF1PwTBuJozL +j2jPpFBo/jQ5fv+dN6PKK45rXtfgrzSpG4VtxssMGhsfi5PB9dytim6pBIVZ0DGyolQ uk9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5337d43Hg+X5gSAnzCFq35VHvKNO7L+aiifo/1VWz6I+duNPExO/ oTbn5YQRs9fYzCjmpnf3EnaKO6cG569wuIfmGTQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJykb/sN81cTeG1jft6hqiogd5Xegj/wSA1uXLl8Arhkk6FFo2PPuvXq+Eg5TJyneO6dYgxCvSsblt7AKf0CYJU= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:3917:: with SMTP id g23mr30601601lja.417.1636890521342; Sun, 14 Nov 2021 03:48:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0A40B090-43E3-484F-B67F-175C3B8F7CD6@php.net> In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2021 18:48:02 +0700 Message-ID: To: Nikita Popov Cc: Ben Ramsey , php internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000f973205d0be46c7" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Deprecate dynamic properties From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) --0000000000000f973205d0be46c7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Nikita, On Fri, Nov 12, 2021, 11:34 PM Nikita Popov wrote: FWIW I think we should always deprecate things as soon as possible, to give > people the maximum amount of awareness and time to address the issue before > the actual removal occurs. I voted no however I agree on this part, with a slight different view on how it may be done. > Meanwhile, 8.2 should include the > > AllowDynamicProperties attribute so folks can start preparing. > > > > Given how attributes in PHP work, this doesn't make sense to me. You can > already use #[AllowDynamicProperties] in your code right now, without any > special support from PHP. Only static analyzers / IDEs need to know that > they shouldn't complain about it even on versions where it does not > technically exist. I agree with other that it should be allowed by default. Also I do see it as a kind of strict mode addition and the depreciation as well could be strict mode only. It could make things too complicated, so only off by default would be an acceptable compromise to me. best Pierre --0000000000000f973205d0be46c7--