Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118236 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 31152 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2022 11:52:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 10 Jul 2022 11:52:33 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31ADB180384 for ; Sun, 10 Jul 2022 06:46:34 -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=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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-wr1-f41.google.com (mail-wr1-f41.google.com [209.85.221.41]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sun, 10 Jul 2022 06:46:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-f41.google.com with SMTP id b26so3972303wrc.2 for ; Sun, 10 Jul 2022 06:46:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NC9bY2TbXDpPx4fRhRW9SfWjhEEGm/2biaaUgG4u5NU=; b=iE6cDUpYmO71WIzu7ePbbrIlEMH+5iLyRRPakFW1txdC+sa+lPrzUAdMP3w9A5TslC 6VYX7qQSEpBxOFeHlBzh/fz5V53cy76/ZhKde9eP3rx/0dOrasCEN3TrFT0r4G69fa4s zhGCKkbFf2AG3VCIVzyHAdAzUt8MgGKqWfnE27XCDuKJ+8UxA3jHGkA4dMYik+3iadvy nXqQqqF7kXxi6s3HsXz9G9OIEabblBcgo9Gra0bmcy9m+LrwRGtqmkPZ4Za0MpnMAIwz 2gkWQbyBUdRvnQivuoDgeck1XnEtDJ8014+90JLRBRMzzECG5fOmVPxuMoinPPtaAwmE ijWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=NC9bY2TbXDpPx4fRhRW9SfWjhEEGm/2biaaUgG4u5NU=; b=rxP2sShgMzG3N/QWzpehYpMSMjf0B2bww76A2oBWHzdAByuMrPihT4Ld2fCNQVeqxh nMeTJ59u/Is932l3zRoGMwDzOYSqfxmeSHEPrHQddSwWYvT4igud40sJAktf+aFHPzkc M0CM4aE4j109XIPWIXHJCzKqo82TkAmrejQTbcECM9jYzKVnUsVMK/yqStuaz7/1rsRY AboH9FGsvzJcraaVxoY0QAELbq6LWKFCvRvl8FLxEsL6y862lRuMnLZJAeWERo10KaRF kslsC5bzibqBQfYXlpsAVHC+lIbCZ+l1EE+s21LPHMRPOVlZgdXCIiF7oZ7YznzPugpJ IQLw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+0NEWS5ksLTM8USd4aRnErBRtAfp74ENnisXp6pjBPp7pnRsuO e0PSdcpcVn01/mlcH9iAAEqDg12KgP4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1ujKUJRKq/L6w59G/iAP2xvB9xW5yNWp2mIWritGEqhYH0/feVcwgvYPnxJgFacfNhE3gpkjw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e3c4:0:b0:21d:9c5d:26ac with SMTP id k4-20020adfe3c4000000b0021d9c5d26acmr4944567wrm.719.1657460792563; Sun, 10 Jul 2022 06:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.22] (cpc104104-brig22-2-0-cust548.3-3.cable.virginm.net. [82.10.58.37]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id a14-20020a056000100e00b0021d70a871cbsm3635897wrx.32.2022.07.10.06.46.31 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 10 Jul 2022 06:46:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <34112e9f-057f-1045-ffdb-99aee9df2353@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2022 14:46:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0 Content-Language: en-GB To: internals@lists.php.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [VOTE] Constants in traits From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Tommins) On 10/07/2022 13:51, Björn Larsson via internals wrote: > I think it's quite unlikely to deprecate such a rather big feature and > from that perspective I think one should do it as good as possible. > > Even if one thinks that this is a bad feature not to be expanded, why > not try to make it work better? So, I hope this RFC passes! I agree. Having sat down and read through the RFC, it is extremely conservative in its scope, and presents a clear case that it will fix a source of bugs in things that people can already do, i.e. reference constants inside a trait definition. It seems very unlikely that this change will make people suddenly use traits in more "wrong" places, nor prevent any alternative horizontal reuse / composition aid features being added in future. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]