Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:120404 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 39354 invoked from network); 27 May 2023 10:40:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 27 May 2023 10:40:58 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C04180083 for ; Sat, 27 May 2023 03:40:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,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-ej1-f50.google.com (mail-ej1-f50.google.com [209.85.218.50]) (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 ; Sat, 27 May 2023 03:40:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-f50.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-96652cb7673so236776466b.0 for ; Sat, 27 May 2023 03:40:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=basereality-com.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1685184056; x=1687776056; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=g9eFrnEeB3/7uQO+/eE45w2VSk3rtrpBCTtioYr75u4=; b=yT4tk2NYY0XDCdM60vKY/5P6sBM7o04OWK8p+NBMIynnG+jwAeCeypy02q+arfE4S3 ykjeMs+KCctc4D7U5MZpv51DiFvgtY+1V63OmT6ftjDNqUZ/gJE9MBgB3URi4YUO/6FN CYwylfyra1nGa0pvWuoLkeQ6D28pMS8Q0XZxarobD2k2NSddo7SJ1uDTRUDDDV9CF5+/ 3GzCTj96/QLnyw83BNEhsBPHQNm26e1s07+puALaPa/ajW5FTGyx2SZ4CAFkc/qhenTV KeIyd3AkbhEfHjIgVsZT+HfTetY427qExmL6tU4sGeQqwqlObrzgh2V4nqcZLXTNp6I0 kgeA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1685184056; x=1687776056; 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=g9eFrnEeB3/7uQO+/eE45w2VSk3rtrpBCTtioYr75u4=; b=b0XdOk5tFPXHIO+MOpsxbAL2I+XJy9JsJTecewDLdyu6nGdpiU5c1sSGDXOPqDX7ZF s/+xWeGmA4OTVs1Ge8o7VftoEiFLibulpOfuufSIZ0OUqAoR8vIZkAGA77tiBFht5Y4L 7TJiAyXeySXqEpCsBEv2amUCMX/lisMY5nmINsfwc2DJrTfgw6533rUMe8Fmq/u7wB5O G5g9V7WK3kVM3OwcYUARTA8Z+99vbYFHsO7n+cp+tog88q4Oro+cILHJzORB1/KXOe/L zjhJVLNKQ2lS6U4H+SokDno2TGQPA16N9j2Qa9jdTJHEB4zKPSAbPe4q7nPD4mqo4O2f MxZw== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDxVlDeEwNjeEp0fMrmUor9AbkOe4x0KAKlBoD6N7SSk/cFuU/yM HlYCJhxeuOvRSXxKumhqTPp59t9POz5Z2nnV2phMGg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7bTGeama1CFXY/Q/n9EFC83hrz97EfMW5nCS2gaNwvy76GwmvbQ9ojCuh4IH3Ci0zzlCL2yUQYUjIkEA/PKWY= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2684:b0:965:fa3b:7478 with SMTP id bn4-20020a170907268400b00965fa3b7478mr5117800ejc.53.1685184055755; Sat, 27 May 2023 03:40:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 27 May 2023 11:40:44 +0100 Message-ID: To: David Gebler Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC [Discussion]: Marking overridden methods (#[\Override]) From: Danack@basereality.com (Dan Ackroyd) On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 22:32, David Gebler wrote: > > either you use static analysis tools as part of your PHP workflow, because > you care about that stuff, or you don't. I these words imply an unpleasant connotation; that people who don't use static analysis tools are bad people who don't care about their code. Just because someone doesn't use the same tools that 'good' programmers who care about their code use, doesn't mean that they 'deserve' to be punished for doing not having having setup those tools*. > I would argue means any new runtime check > warrants the utmost consideration of cost-benefit. The Override annotation is a small thing that we can add to PHP, that has a very low cost, and would benefit programmers who haven't had enough time/experience to setup static analysis tools. It appears to be a 'positive sum' proposal. Or as Ilija Tovilo wrote: > > The benefits seem worth the maintenance cost, even if small for the > average user. cheers Dan Ack * At least in this case, because having to deal with code that uses inheritance is already punishment enough.