Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:121910
Message-ID: <436b1498-ee89-4a37-8c55-696cc8c20e8d@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2023 16:02:30 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <b9857726-4037-47e4-9407-41b9262af9fc@gmail.com>
 <74dcffb7-e8c1-45c8-ae41-9fc0f050f484@app.fastmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <74dcffb7-e8c1-45c8-ae41-9fc0f050f484@app.fastmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] [RFC] Final anonymous classes
From: daniil.gentili@gmail.com (Daniil Gentili)

Hi Nikita,
> For the record, I've voted against this proposal because I believe it 
> should have gone with option 2, that is to *always* make anonymous 
> classes final.
>
> It makes very little sense to me that everyone needs to explicitly 
> mark their anonymous classes as final just because there is a 
> class_alias loophole that could, in theory, have been used to extend 
> anonymous classes in the past. Especially given that there is no 
> evidence of this "feature" being used in the wild (or if there is such 
> evidence, it was not presented in the proposal).
>
Should I amend the RFC, recreating the current poll with three mutually 
exclusive options (final anonymous classes, final by default without 
open, final by default with open) instead of just Yes/No (I personally 
share your PoV, but given the minor pushback received in the last 
discussion thread I initially decided against it), could that be done 
without restarting the discussion process?


Regards,

Daniil Gentili.