Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:122093
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAGgaK7+w_zdp30Pi5nJ-y+GPEkfc2xHfFUW+DwdpNtY8iPjMHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOWwgpkW65ngNVrtu3oZ3_yAw4W+Qe1DsQ9LN-pfet_Psdy==Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABdc3WrjXkZSwfi+6mxDizKURhy7w8VUXoiAXEEytnwpGCEaUg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOWwgp=Eo+dJbXVzumOJkrAQE8dG+eVZahJbd4326J8Ut6YtEA@mail.gmail.com> <CABdc3Wo9Lu7=dFv1=9r1R6Ezw0H13Pe1ntcx8G6-TBHUntrG6Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABdc3Wo9Lu7=dFv1=9r1R6Ezw0H13Pe1ntcx8G6-TBHUntrG6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 11:10:42 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOWwgp=ELQ38FhpiYFhXwT2abYu=5xDR7aKnkKEFVbL136PrrQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Marcin_Brzuchalski?= <michal.brzuchalski@gmail.com>
Cc: Max Semenik <maxsem.wiki@gmail.com>, Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a89b07060e07d4e6"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] NotSerializable attribute
From: nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com (Nicolas Grekas)

--000000000000a89b07060e07d4e6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>
>
>>> =C5=9Br., 3 sty 2024 o 08:12 Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.c=
om>
>>> napisa=C5=82(a):
>>>
>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>
>>>> Hi, I'd like to propose a new attribute, #[NotSerializable]. This
>>>> > functionality is already available for internal classes - userspace
>>>> should
>>>> > benefit from it, too.
>>>> >
>>>> > The RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/not_serializable
>>>> > Proposed implementation: https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/12788
>>>> >
>>>> > Please let me know what you think.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the inheritance-related behavior ("The non-serializable flag
>>>> is
>>>> inherited by descendants"), this is very unlike any other attributes,
>>>> and
>>>> this actively prevents writing a child class that'd make a parent
>>>> serializable if it wants to.
>>>>
>>>> To me, if this is really the behavior we want, then the attribute
>>>> should be
>>>> replaced by a maker interface.
>>>> Then, a simple "instanceof NotSerializable" would be enough instead of
>>>> adding yet another method to ReflectionClass.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This should be possible without ReflectionClass, see
>>> https://3v4l.org/N3fmO
>>>
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>> My main point is : why use an attribute? this should be an interface to
>> me. All semantics match an interface.
>>
>>
>>> From the serialization libraries you can find similar attributes
>>>
>>
>> Those a very different, because they tackle the problem from the
>> *external* angle: the attributes there describe how a system *external* =
to
>> the class itself should best serialize an object. There, attributes make
>> sense, because they enrich the description of the class without forcibly
>> telling what to do with the object
>>
>> But in the RFC, we're talking about the object deciding itself how it
>> should be (not) serialized. This is enforced and thus belongs to the
>> typesystem - not to an attribute.
>>
>
> But then what should implement the NotSerializable interface?
> If you want to ignore a string-typed property there would be no option to
> mark it with a NotSerializable interface
> Consider "baz" property in this example:
>
> class Foo {
>     protected int $bar =3D 1;
>     #[NotSerializable]
>     protected string $baz =3D 2;
> }
>


The attribute is #[Attribute(Attribute::TARGET_CLASS] so I'm not sure why
you consider this as it's not mentioned in the RFC (and I'm not sure it
would make sense).

--000000000000a89b07060e07d4e6--