Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:119423 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 24999 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2023 08:30:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 25 Jan 2023 08:30:55 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FB43180539 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:30:54 -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-wr1-f45.google.com (mail-wr1-f45.google.com [209.85.221.45]) (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 ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:30:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-f45.google.com with SMTP id h12so12232184wrv.10 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:30:53 -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=61QAFl2lHGZNdj+DQ49rF8KzXBnFDa41ww37ZeST97A=; b=pqzWUd221PkqV+GG4yd3Ttr3iy4N2reA35R0rXhT6gwcG4VjZCuv4XDHvfmjLw6kGn CUrDKaXIsyPcJCG1DT5qfLfZZWG0ZytoflJz6P3CKOgg59UquaElB4OzQkOqu9h7PGn+ igbV4q5BfkkaXsUhC+1VvNvGWiFOK+tLlP9FIBsLhhYQQhqfxJk/hZey2dgqqsCf741S OE+0hQnpvxYznioyc0ZIN/JGDC0CSBK+xb3xiX9qWOrZXcQQvNAo2CgFn9qbPi6XVfD/ AfLeCUK+yBqz6Jb0S0zPTDKo2A6pTKhul+OC2Cf2wEw/XwWXh1sUXtlSXYKcVKaidAJV 8Pog== 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=61QAFl2lHGZNdj+DQ49rF8KzXBnFDa41ww37ZeST97A=; b=oqYR/x2Dkn+gZIB1BfJsSKr9U2hea1PhBR3kTWJJPocQqZF43tALuaZzZBQlotqEfN EtehnTlj36JtXpcwFRCu3+aelqdo+3hK05XMS5l+m8ohBD3rGnIV6lKGZVsxkTXYcKjS 5qVnz3uWazId7NyXMA0dmW5Zj0vfvFY/CmD0uBw88IvD2uukCEjxTSOHlGtJ1z634MT2 tbQQtw8h1aGcHCK8NSLLUv1sW4idbIiZovtG3C/+z/MNL3J7PSPEHENZZVMlRPf3ZzSX fxZo50yz3EmNSqDaVdIbRR7uoxIuKClLuWTtWohHfON7j8fEurWbSkVlPgTQMRdFSAss pFlQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kov+Uiw34cxljhepr6qSJP53FAU+bZ1OmzMf9bIi/D804PaWWoY fZQEOLEHuVl5hddoEF3JhF4QtfJ0eKRDv2bwqrI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXtdaixovQcbxgzYhfGMs83Sfz4zyXlvlwI2pKD9WuIOrxml+yzBgtVpGDXMwIfSonQODKwx4YTybSWZW15FOCs= X-Received: by 2002:adf:fbd1:0:b0:2bd:cc92:530d with SMTP id d17-20020adffbd1000000b002bdcc92530dmr774275wrs.461.1674635452474; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 00:30:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:30:40 +0100 Message-ID: To: "Matthew Weier O'Phinney" Cc: PHP Internals List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000045eb0a05f312735b" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Vote] Readonly amendments From: nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com (Nicolas Grekas) --00000000000045eb0a05f312735b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Matthew, > 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. > We've added a few examples on the RFC that should help clarify. Here is the link to the diff: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_amendments?do=diff&rev2%5B0%5D=1674550446&rev2%5B1%5D=1674635113&difftype=sidebyside And the link to the updated RFC of course: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_amendments Nicolas --00000000000045eb0a05f312735b--