Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:119417 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 57215 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2023 14:27:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 24 Jan 2023 14:27:18 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6EF1804F7 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 06:27:17 -0800 (PST) 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_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-ua1-f42.google.com (mail-ua1-f42.google.com [209.85.222.42]) (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 ; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 06:27:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ua1-f42.google.com with SMTP id j21so2647700uap.5 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 06:27:16 -0800 (PST) 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:message-id:reply-to; bh=z8eHL9qRRvJveKcEbBBvZ7V1GRKMbHRIqe0uJUAiCC8=; b=Xyfxa0TZacTPOjAdJ3L2hjgffJmyNE+3B7fQHGX0PHPKzXaqanH8ph5WBanknpxhkf 5Rbk5xkKIw+XPZCGI2XL8P+XxXrgTtCGZL0oMflvpm1PnHyE4BEEUMNTapqAgEtJ9VKq EAAlSRXeGerxCpkmCOkVJroBH+D7Jm4rUKh29W6UkV9122AyqQMK47RaPixiI5lTNz9J VuS1d0q7F9HGjYyxkcRbMmw86nOptT9DzTLB15D3EyUtcHtOwrQW9CqLBPN4C8t+y09T WUg8pVLqsieE/4xd73MSa7u0qy9BPModYGhueAHghmOmFDqF5oDC6C8/fY/Lcw5ayBpk 141Q== 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:message-id :reply-to; bh=z8eHL9qRRvJveKcEbBBvZ7V1GRKMbHRIqe0uJUAiCC8=; b=twlN3/d7rihb1svd/HXIMB4Fk22+ZYRzFeTXa68ayHEEnuhWvmY5G01SyqIdjMyWZ8 4A4C9oj5eAJVk9Y5a5o1qotVVJd7fj6Gelf2uasx5ihipRbkq3dfNFL1O0e//q1Hlilx bYeehApkpie3OQ+9AWqOYo5gKu+R2X4mrunSiS3F0tKe+sWtp5x/9dMT8UYTKKtiX42u M10y3TXUQV9EqvpXQDobHxWDgIu6XgsSmHgXXJdpu6nkM7JFDZ9kh+VHr6dIdzQw5BAr UcaPnigt3Bdigvjo21nGzrf/NRts6Yoay0bHxwpFFB68fbeRFNYC/b2hOERapxYUhljQ TfNw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kqyoAtb2AUhxigpfWmxC/x8sPyyGYPiBNyzaOPK8g34lvRoapHr Lvr5J5i78SeLGBQJ4kw/HzxI2g+9/xsXHaw+57JdvRYLcpuJiQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXuZNfjbXPrBZk/jUfQNlfPspssjrz6PTYlGXzpM8YD1X6SDgqhJkklJEE5QxQefIPKTDdJh8J32QPXpDexD5Zw= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:48e3:0:b0:55b:eea0:1dcd with SMTP id y32-20020ab048e3000000b0055beea01dcdmr3207488uac.103.1674570435921; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 06:27:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 08:27:04 -0600 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?TcOhdMOpIEtvY3Npcw==?= Cc: PHP Internals List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fc0e2105f3034f61" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Vote] Readonly amendments From: mweierophinney@gmail.com ("Matthew Weier O'Phinney") --000000000000fc0e2105f3034f61 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 2:55 AM M=C3=A1t=C3=A9 Kocsis wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > We've just opened the vote for the "Readonly amendments" RFC, which is > going to be open for 2 weeks (until 2023-02-07). > > Link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_amendments > Discussion: https://externals.io/message/119007 > I missed something when reviewing previously. Under the Proposal 1 section is the following verbiage: > readonly classes can declare neither static, nor untyped properties, no matter if the declaration is done directly in the class or indirectly via a trait (https://github.com/php/php-src/issues/9285). Under this RFC, their non-readonly child classes would support them as any other child class does= . However, the example demonstrates neither static nor untyped properties. As such, it's hard to understand what pattern you are trying to enable here. Could you provide an example of a child class that uses static and/or untyped properties, please? Basically trying to understand what this would enable, and why. --=20 Matthew Weier O'Phinney mweierophinney@gmail.com https://mwop.net/ he/him --000000000000fc0e2105f3034f61--