Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:122412
Feedback-ID: i8414410d:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.11.0-alpha0-144-ge5821d614e-fm-20240125.002-ge5821d61
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a8c25497-cd75-4270-8572-62ba28457f4d@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKkgovSFUMwhdVERHHb-5Pw7Bm_hBcYbZqPH58JX1mvhW6d=rg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAKkgovSFUMwhdVERHHb-5Pw7Bm_hBcYbZqPH58JX1mvhW6d=rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 09:51:02 -0600
To: "php internals" <internals@lists.php.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC Proposal : Allows calling non-static public methods through
 the __callStatic magic method instead of throwing an error.
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: larry@garfieldtech.com ("Larry Garfield")

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024, at 7:56 PM, =ED=95=98=EB=8A=98=EC=95=84=EB=B6=80=EC=
=A7=80 wrote:
> Hi.
> I'd like to propose an RFC, but I don't have the authority.
> Below is my suggestion.
> If you think this makes sense, please write an RFC for me.
> Sincerely.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Introduction =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> Allows calling non-static public methods through the __callStatic magi=
c=20
> method instead of throwing an error.
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Proposal =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> From a conceptual perspective:
> It goes without saying that calling a non-static method statically wil=
l=20
> result in an error.
> However, a confusing situation occurred when the __callStatic magic=20
> method exists.
> Non-public methods can be called, but public methods cannot.
> This is the opposite of the method visibility policy.
>
> From a practical point of view:
> If you can call Non-static public methods through the __callStatic=20
> magic method, you can write code like Laravel ORM more simply and tidy.
>
> <code>
> User::foo()->bar();
> </code>
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D Before =3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> <code>
> class Foo
> {
>     protected static ?Foo $instance =3D null;
>
>     public static function __callStatic($method, $args)
>     {
>         $instance =3D self::$instance ?? self::$instance =3D new stati=
c();
>         return $instance->__call($method, $args);
>     }
>
>     public function __call($method, $args)
>     {
>         if (method_exists($this, $method)) {
>             return $instance->$method(...$args);
>         }
>
>         return $this;
>     }
>
>     protected function bar()
>     {
>         echo __METHOD__ . '<br />';
>
>         return $this;
>     }
>
>     protected function baz()
>     {
>         echo __METHOD__ . '<br />';
>
>         return $this;
>     }
> }
>
> Foo::bar()->baz();
> (new Foo())->bar()->baz();
> </code>
>
> There is no error, but the concept of method visibility is broken.
> All Non-public methods can be called at instance scope.
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D After =3D=3D=3D=3D
>
> <code>
> class Foo
> {
>     protected static ?Foo $instance =3D null;
>
>     public static function __callStatic($method, $args)
>     {
>         $instance =3D self::$instance ?? self::$instance =3D new stati=
c();
>
>         if (method_exists($instance, $method)) {
>             return $instance->$method(...$args);
>         }
>
>         return $instance;
>     }
>
>     public function bar()
>     {
>         echo __METHOD__ . '<br />';
>
>         return $this;
>     }
>
>     public function baz()
>     {
>         echo __METHOD__ . '<br />';
>
>         return $this;
>     }
> }
>
> Foo::bar()->baz();
> (new Foo())->bar()->baz();
> </code>
>
> This is more tidy.
> Only public methods are callable at instance scope.

That calling bar() works at all in this example is rather accidental.  T=
he whole point of a non-static method is that it has an implicit require=
d $this argument to it.  Without a required argument, a method cannot be=
 called, because it is supposed to fail.

In fact, even your "before" example fails: https://3v4l.org/moH0s

I don't think what you describe is even possible, nor would it be a good=
 idea.

See also: https://peakd.com/hive-168588/@crell/cutting-through-the-static

--Larry Garfield