Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118393
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\))
In-Reply-To: <b3688412-a75a-2a65-1e05-41c8b4b30de6@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 11:21:49 +0700
Cc: internals <internals@lists.php.net>,
 Rowan Tommins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <D7C4649A-7071-4BF1-9C7C-B1C721E54640@koalephant.com>
References: <ec4bc6e5-39ac-4a36-9d63-cca8dc6a29a6@www.fastmail.com>
 <C7124120-30F1-4D4F-8569-C928AC63B999@koalephant.com>
 <b3688412-a75a-2a65-1e05-41c8b4b30de6@gmail.com>
To: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Asymmetric visibility
From: php-lists@koalephant.com (Stephen Reay)


> On 8 Aug 2022, at 20:21, Rowan Tommins <rowan.collins@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> On 08/08/2022 10:09, Stephen Reay wrote:
>> The RFC states that it=E2=80=99s to keep consistency with `readonly`, =
because __set on a readonly property that=E2=80=99s initialised throws =
an error - but isn=E2=80=99t that because of the nature of it being =
readonly, rather than because of the visibility rules? The error given =
is "Cannot modify readonly property=E2=80=9D thrown from within the =
__set() method, not "Cannot access protected property=E2=80=9D thrown =
from the outside calling context, when the __set() method is not =
implemented.
>=20
>=20
> If a property is "public readonly", the __set method is never called =
if you try to reassign it: https://3v4l.org/8PioE The proposal is that =
the same applies if it is "public private(set)": the assignment =
immediately fails, rather than falling back to the __set method.
>=20
> The logic, I think, is that a completely private property is =
"invisible", so __set acts like it doesn't exist at all and runs =
*instead of* the assignment; but a "public readonly" or "public =
private(set)" property is "visible", so the assignment is attempted and =
fails.
>=20
> However, I am concerned that the rules around where __set and __get =
are called are becoming increasingly complex with a lot of different =
concepts interacting - "declared", "defined", "typed", "initialized", =
"visible", "modifiable", etc.
>=20
> As I mentioned in a previous discussion, I think we need to work =
towards simplifying this - e.g. merge "typed" and "untyped" properties =
by making "public $foo" equivalent to "public mixed $foo", which would =
remove the distinction between "defined" and "initialized".
>=20
> Regards,
>=20
> --=20
> Rowan Tommins
> [IMSoP]
>=20
> --=20
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
>=20

Hi Rowan,

Thanks for trying to explain the logic here.

@Larry is Rowan=E2=80=99s assessment accurate?


Cheers

Stephen=20=