Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:122097
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> <CAOWwgp=ELQ38FhpiYFhXwT2abYu=5xDR7aKnkKEFVbL136PrrQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOWwgp=ELQ38FhpiYFhXwT2abYu=5xDR7aKnkKEFVbL136PrrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 15:19:18 +0100
Message-ID: <CABdc3WrOkwGCop9J0H2uqLa0xyhwxH3SaEffo=Dmk=mDpS8jaw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com>
Cc: Max Semenik <maxsem.wiki@gmail.com>, Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009a63de060e0b4d7c"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Discussion] NotSerializable attribute
From: michal.brzuchalski@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Marcin_Brzuchalski?=)

--0000000000009a63de060e0b4d7c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=C5=9Br., 3 sty 2024 o 11:10 Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com>
napisa=C5=82(a):

>
>>>> =C5=9Br., 3 sty 2024 o 08:12 Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.=
com>
>>>> 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 fla=
g
>>>>> 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 o=
f
>>>>> 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 mak=
e
>>> sense, because they enrich the description of the class without forcibl=
y
>>> 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 t=
o
>> 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).
>

Apologies, apparently I didn't read.

Cheers

--0000000000009a63de060e0b4d7c--