Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:120066
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAH5C8xUn2wotLg0L7KZHoOGf3q-UqbL=47p2PLzK_mOBb=MJXQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAH5C8xUn2wotLg0L7KZHoOGf3q-UqbL=47p2PLzK_mOBb=MJXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 11:40:04 +0200
Message-ID: <CAB-BujYioG0HfLy94XV0GiGE-fe7Zfge=z56Vj=fR3aD338OdA@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?TcOhdMOpIEtvY3Npcw==?= <kocsismate90@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] [Discussion] Clone with
From: andreas@dqxtech.net (Andreas Hennings)

> The biggest advantage of Nicolas' proposal over =E2=80=9Cclone with=E2=80=
=9D is that it could be made part of the interface contract whether a metho=
d modifies the object state. So the PSR-7 ResponseInterface could look like=
 the following:
> [..]
> public clone function withStatus($code, $reasonPhrase =3D '');

If this is the main argument, I think I would prefer a more general
"readonly" modifier on methods.

public readonly function withStatus($code, $reasonPhrase =3D ''): static;

> One cannot control whether $this should really be cloned: e.g. if a prope=
rty should only be modified based on certain conditions (e.g. validation), =
the object would potentially be cloned in vain, resulting in a performance =
loss.

Exactly. I would say "conditionally clone", e.g. only clone if there
is a change, or if we don't already have a cached instance with this
value.

I think the "clone with" is much more flexible because we can call
this anywhere, not just in a dedicated method.

This said, I do agree with some of the benefits of the "Alternative" propos=
al.

-- Andreas


On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 at 08:32, M=C3=A1t=C3=A9 Kocsis <kocsismate90@gmail.com=
> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Quite some time after mentioning the "clone with" construct the first tim=
e
> (at the end of the
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/write_once_properties#run-time_behaviour section=
),
> finally I managed to create a working implementation for this feature whi=
ch
> would make it possible to properly modify readonly properties
> while simplifying how we write "wither" methods:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/clone_with
>
> Regards,
> M=C3=A1t=C3=A9 Kocsis