Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:119054
Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-1115-g8b801eadce-fm-20221102.001-g8b801ead
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <cb2ca327-fc62-4c2d-bde1-f95d50f53c49@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <434BDABD-8551-46C8-98EC-8CA87952AE25@gmail.com>
References: <0854b030-c51c-4c1b-a7dd-22835a1e5da9@app.fastmail.com>
 <831b9906-dc0c-420c-b22f-8a0cc8a1ad64@app.fastmail.com>
 <434BDABD-8551-46C8-98EC-8CA87952AE25@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 19:27:41 -0600
To: "php internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Asymmetric Visibility, with readonly
From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield")

On Tue, Nov 29, 2022, at 5:46 PM, Claude Pache wrote:

> In the RFC, section Permitted visibility 
> (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/asymmetric-visibility#permitted_visibility 
> <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/asymmetric-visibility#permitted_visibility>):
>> The set visibility, if it differs from the main (get) visibility, MUST be strictly lesser than the main visibility. That is, the set visibility may only be protected or private. If the main visibility is protected, set visibility may only be private. Any violation of this rule will result in a compile time error.
>> 
> The first sentence does not forbid `public public(set)`, or `protected 
> protected(set)`, etc. (the `set` visibility does not differ from the 
> main visibility), but the rest of the paragraph does not allow it. That 
> should be clarified.

Er.  That's exactly what it says: "strictly lesser" than the main visibility.  The lines after are just restating it.  "public public(set)" is not allowed.

(We may relax that in the future to make it compatible with readonly, but that's for later.)

>
> (Because forbidding `public public(set)`, etc., makes it slightly more 
> cumbersome to explain the rules, I am slightly in favour not to forbid 
> it.)
>
>> There is one exception, that of a private readonly property. That would technically expand to private private(set) readonly, which is allowed.
>
> That sentence should be deleted, as `readonly` is now forbidden.

Good catch, fixed.  Thanks.

--Larry Garfield