Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118204
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAH19jWhvuLBT3kZ-u1SPEgwEec=JfALuaiy+Lma9F8WAbqANWw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH19jWhvuLBT3kZ-u1SPEgwEec=JfALuaiy+Lma9F8WAbqANWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2022 11:45:50 +0200
Message-ID: <CADyq6s+Nf7GOyj1gOjt4o5a80B7LcP73Tq3Y3aTG_KGLx0q5vA@mail.gmail.com>
To: shinji igarashi <sji@sj-i.dev>
Cc: internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000513f3005e31fd641"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Constants in traits
From: ocramius@gmail.com (Marco Pivetta)

--000000000000513f3005e31fd641
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hey Shinji,

On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 23:39, shinji igarashi <sji@sj-i.dev> wrote:

> Hello internals,
>
> I've started the vote for the Constants in Traits RFC:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/constants_in_traits
>
> The vote will end on 19. July 2022.
>

I voted "NO" on this.

Reasoning:

 * traits are pretty much unnecessary in the language. Since their
introduction in PHP 5.4 their usage went from "let's try this out" to "how
do I burn this with fire?". I don't want traits to expand in scope: they
already do enough damage with their built-in accidental complexity.
 * invariants shared by trait (example in the RFC) are generally to be
separated to clear invariant objects/functions/static methods, instead of
being put in a trait
 * a trait does not know the public API of its implementor either, so
`self::SOME_CONSTANT` inside a trait points nowhere sensible, since there
is no clear contract on the possible implementations. Referencing symbols
of the implementing class in a trait is a clear mistake (again, an example
from the RFC)
 * this expands trait compatibility checks, introducing a number of
potential error scenarios that are unnecessary (due to the already
mind-boggling over-complicated `use TRAIT1, TRAIT2, TRAIT3` semantics)

In practice, while this may make on surface because you can declare
constants everywhere, declaring more stuff on traits is problematic.

From a technical and detail PoV, your RFC is well written and implemented:
it just solves a problem that doesn't/shouldn't need solving.

Greets,

Marco Pivetta

https://twitter.com/Ocramius

https://ocramius.github.io/

--000000000000513f3005e31fd641--