Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:119341
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAH5C8xUd4ueJ62pR6vT2haz9rFgrgspJQui1rPCqTneupD+tsQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADyq6sLFZpM1A+V-aa3dWjY1mL=65e-kxeiyBHABNPZR2GfpKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPFaMKc-PQD8YD6yDWPrMONcJdYqFCXgyJZuZZBVsT7VSy89A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADyq6sJxNQKvDNsT48tsG=AUS8snbGvuR332Yaip-krd+yynaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFPFaML4Xq7Oo+pN7cAj3aQt3y3et33EzsQhxhqNZA22nOUuNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADK1yXLSVH0X=dteA=GO+=UPSzSDfCecALytjRFG-u+0QRyGWg@mail.gmail.com> <a719c9d1-de30-41d2-b7ae-24dc53a57d90@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <a719c9d1-de30-41d2-b7ae-24dc53a57d90@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 09:01:01 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH5C8xUer=mrRNYrdYpiYk6Z+nfaeZuacCJdAa3Oi8hyw97+Cg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
Cc: php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002ed02105f2995631"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Readonly class amendments
From: kocsismate90@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?TcOhdMOpIEtvY3Npcw==?=)

--0000000000002ed02105f2995631
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Everyone,

As discussion apparently stalled, and since we managed to update the RFC
with the recently brought up arguments, we would like to start the vote
soon, possibly early next week, unless someone finds a new topic to discuss=
.

M=C3=A1t=C3=A9

Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> ezt =C3=ADrta (id=C5=91pont: 2022. =
nov. 30.,
Sze, 20:35):

> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022, at 9:46 AM, Deleu wrote:
> > After reading GPB, Nicolas, Jordan and Larry's considerations, I no
> longer
> > have any objections to this RFC. Here is my summary of it all:
> >
> > - It's very easy for everyone to wrongly interpret readonly as somewhat
> > immutable, but it isn't (docs/education issue)
> > - LSP is about the writer of the child class, not about PHP
> > - If you don't want child classes to violate LSP, make your class `fina=
l
> > readonly`
> > - readonly as "constructor-init" properties mindset make it even strong=
er
> > the argument that child classes should be free to choose their definiti=
on
> > because constructors are special methods not bound by inheritance.
>
> Just for the record, my whole point is that "readonly as constructor-init=
"
> is wrong, and I am angry at the SA tools that have invented that out of
> whole cloth because it just breaks workflows that I am using very
> effectively and safely.  I always turn off that check in those because th=
ey
> are wrong.  That is *not* how the language feature is implemented, so
> making other language feature decisions based on that incorrect, artifici=
al
> "rule" is highly dangerous.
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--0000000000002ed02105f2995631--