Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:118559 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 58021 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2022 11:00:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 4 Sep 2022 11:00:17 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F75C1804AA for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2022 04:00:15 -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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,FREEMAIL_REPLY, HTML_MESSAGE,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-yw1-f180.google.com (mail-yw1-f180.google.com [209.85.128.180]) (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, 4 Sep 2022 04:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw1-f180.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-33dc31f25f9so49459837b3.11 for ; Sun, 04 Sep 2022 04:00:14 -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:subject:date; bh=Tgw90miKxetJBfQzjJhimJXmKRGpMM8lyHMZ79BA0QQ=; b=ViZGYbH/cXMVrCIzr4Mq4rnA1O6DNS6KxeyzldOxTPTVoj1ZWlvWveNLE7NJEvujan 0PVvIpNsLpWnSr4f6vtNfxPHpYfhjtJWebdmiuH4rAgOY1aDyizZCORFqWgfre/LeBJo shdMm6FRgbtlZLNQhGPBprPa9BOUlEVyCnGCySXicRRECScYHS2IwqOfjt5MJxN8pbbP eQ+XBN4zZasoPn/R6qRDeQvCJVTbUSjhtZ9aHJyIpO3e76AP714emYYLaVqKDH4hrRLF D23BEUYfPRmaBiLXJm32Lr+vs9DmD/ctbBi8HzLWc4ehPzUaMzPkZ1QMl7LKoaCoecer e0Ww== 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:subject:date; bh=Tgw90miKxetJBfQzjJhimJXmKRGpMM8lyHMZ79BA0QQ=; b=QsYCTHnNjrbfGw7D9WkfB/PF9AwLEl9GAyrf+C9t8G5yY7jWobYRS1OsLPL9YOn8jg xocEVq1ka0xqL7jERTuS00fEiUP+EymvC6rpNFwQwLfbQ0G4pDE19RDNNZ+iAbtK77mO +fZ6tT1DZbgQGsT23nM7MSZSzbRvCexmxmGqjBXe2MgiJ0WLIfbcnfio60YxXY2iKfB4 lMGIrklXkQsZVMb7Ps6AMY1QaxF+VgZ8RtDAXQCPBc41qR7LfOiIicFTIhefEweLTsb4 pyZmC49U/lJLCVZw8RsW5RPgYp7h3NlcHKiE8v7P4Xb6vBf0hiP7bmdEplCaglYYvKp7 NbmA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo2XoiCr1fmOtMDFwwSNaCNHr3Ufpd9Lvo39XIv7h5+JBLPRNYs3 zVf86F+NqygJip2z2BXmpIumZSU48zOwYvitDaQsr92fqEInIA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR4qv6novEHdUtnEa7Yp4eJGB6utzBvmigkmjA1BijTV4KjeUjo9nj9hy0W/R9kr0oUDzpp0ZLQ6bBIjn+3eNL0= X-Received: by 2002:a81:914c:0:b0:33d:d15e:1b50 with SMTP id i73-20020a81914c000000b0033dd15e1b50mr34636430ywg.292.1662289214003; Sun, 04 Sep 2022 04:00:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2022 13:00:01 +0200 Message-ID: To: Nicolas Grekas Cc: PHP Internals List , =?UTF-8?B?TcOhdMOpIEtvY3Npcw==?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001d5d1805e7d7dee1" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Issues with readonly classes From: ocramius@gmail.com (Marco Pivetta) --0000000000001d5d1805e7d7dee1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It doesn't break anything: we have a new limitation, we observe if it is problematic, we remove that limitation if that is the case. That already happened for PHP 8.1, although I can't remember the exact feature. Let the side wheels attached for now =F0=9F=91=8D On Sun, 4 Sep 2022, 12:46 Nicolas Grekas, wrote: > Hi Marco, > > IMO good as-is: can be relaxed later (8.3 or later), if anybody believes >> it's a show-stopper. >> > Readonly classes don't really need to be lazy. >> > > "Break things and move slow" doesn't feel right to me for the language. > Maybe you don't see the need for lazy readonly classes, but that's > nonetheless inconsistent. > > Note that lazy-loading is just an example. Any kind of inheritance-based > decorator will be broken, as far as cloning is concerned. This should be > discussed to me. > > Nicolas > --0000000000001d5d1805e7d7dee1--