Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118386 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 72306 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2022 07:44:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 8 Aug 2022 07:44:24 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E69FF180543 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 02:45:38 -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=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,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-oa1-f45.google.com (mail-oa1-f45.google.com [209.85.160.45]) (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 ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 02:45:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa1-f45.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-10d845dcf92so9885765fac.12 for ; Mon, 08 Aug 2022 02:45:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc; bh=NiNA1i1CPOvqIw0NYniSNwHoOODYzDq+TsFQ7Jpzt2c=; b=bEwzBjySU4UKohsdq2gYrI6Ix9522oxeh9TOlJ/fnAGl9RAFU3+UKLUNnxE70IGrB6 5Ueu4luVea4QFmtbEoDKIwbB6/vlJr2cuLtmh5dtrpbq61NR45B+834TI1uok1++fAd4 cCxs0fZ4lGj0S0m+/dgpJ9AEWqF/+M4/XHt8PAw7vpDx+ssGCPHolC/7QtnwNG2mF2Cp ans5X7+f4T8FOe8zEdcq1jD1WV9cWRjMu1RM4YmGOM5d/ih2kKb0hMfod6ieJFPymj5o UPPIL69dDb4VAbul7Nr3bT0IdzyHK3Ye169sgGegTSDrhX0ajb+kWAojXH41fCCX4Xc5 hI+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=NiNA1i1CPOvqIw0NYniSNwHoOODYzDq+TsFQ7Jpzt2c=; b=IGxCFklTW2A2HlNzCIlCFBI/DOtFiIb2GYLpDwOLbKcnodT+hGLw7TwzGb+P76TEbR aTKwbTekns1V6KqwUra5hBaaS2pBbCH4JY12ayXUB2rNoxdqiaG9GybZpbk8Y6DE+c/B lONcf0RTMzPrLx2iyUT+HjPBkbhXNQjkyGKwtpZ08E0zEH2iyPB3Dl0c0gw7wArCQI5n Ht+EbeMfdSUvP9Zw43QmiE522vPcqq2E5SRVX5EljPshwpbVJ0sKO5uRraq+oL244t5Z anOzqnsa1/PHCJVEmj9xFGwCCyCmfTOVYFH82Alo4xSA8GWbvvWiQqf/Ng7rnv+LOJ0E OeHg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo3l3ZL9ofwT68acaj/RZUnTPGOftxbSm0ZazTonuSWz1HW0EWJR Y1cLF733pd2jPuSiunB3fXGkaImohK6jM9xv6nFwgE5/v+s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR7QPG2bB/LsllQX7EvnNLYP6mHIZVl5PBYSE6yauTZUKrzvRTPeTJgUPyA+WL7O/OnwLg/BOf0RPpVA4ILIkLg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:51cb:b0:fb:5c97:bd1b with SMTP id b11-20020a05687051cb00b000fb5c97bd1bmr8307954oaj.104.1659951937669; Mon, 08 Aug 2022 02:45:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2022 11:45:01 +0200 Message-ID: To: Larry Garfield Cc: php internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000096cd1405e5b7ad85" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Asymmetric visibility From: deleugyn@gmail.com (Deleu) --00000000000096cd1405e5b7ad85 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 7:09 PM Larry Garfield wrote: > Ilija Tovilo and I are happy to present the first new RFC for PHP 8.3: > Asymmetric Visibility. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/asymmetric-visibility > > Details are in the RFC, but it's largely a copy of Swift's support for the > same. > > -- > Larry Garfield > larry@garfieldtech.com > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > Just wanted to point out that I loved syntax proposals by Juliette and Mike. Any of them would be better. Making a better syntax for PHP would be better than consistency with Swift, IMO. But I'm also inclined to agree with Marco Pivetta that this change is a lot less exciting now that we have `readonly`. In extremely rare cases where I need to modify an attribute more than once, I just fallback to private + getter and the nice thing about it is that it creates a consistent mindset that if a property is being accessed via a getter, then the reader should be advised that the property may change depending on WHEN it's accessed. -- Marco Deleu --00000000000096cd1405e5b7ad85--