Newsgroups: php.internals,php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:123470 php.internals:123471 X-Original-To: internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: internals@lists.php.net Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (php-smtp4.php.net [45.112.84.5]) by qa.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 843AB1A009C for ; Fri, 31 May 2024 13:12:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=php.net; s=mail; t=1717161183; bh=u5MxJ41yNSoP/Lo/TdOWeGi/xxr8zt0E0j11LKjhrsI=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:From; b=gElyK4uoKAg8RWw3aR6TjINWKIs9MYynVpC19Y3o78JzqsI+iDtrOHDj+qvxtNzKQ 1r65vtLWSjyzbmaatmvG3H4aTwVQWWrQLQQmLayWriJM33e82O9+j1oOqK5cRyfnKd fwQL6P2oZgCUGpRLvIXlHcQTqHOK3f05NFh61Jt24ANaE+N3gwkfgNXlF+rLkBf2YK BboB0iK6KTPFUK0C9g7sdWHLkQguoSUmKzvrEtZQBYBcjjZEzk3hlJRoYExIE+zGwB ovUIIhQvgx1iHAvED3WgQNThtBpDQHnd6DHQoA6gIXlI5FARvzh277AxgxKIiAAQ1r N45LDjVsZaS3g== Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AE5E18066D for ; Fri, 31 May 2024 13:13:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,DMARC_PASS,FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 X-Spam-Virus: Error (Cannot connect to unix socket '/var/run/clamav/clamd.ctl': connect: Connection refused) X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-ej1-f42.google.com (mail-ej1-f42.google.com [209.85.218.42]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 31 May 2024 13:13:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ej1-f42.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a62db0c8c9cso209619366b.2 for ; Fri, 31 May 2024 06:12:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1717161119; x=1717765919; darn=lists.php.net; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=D11NPhjDgZEZuIWOxX99PzMw9yBtzzjlGXOjEAybkME=; b=V8tMuG/a0FHcZnee6e7jFENIJ1NxUxm4EfqAgwUNKzMVWEbLaC8rZJYUBBpZ1LkEdI MrYiHNhHLbrHKpl1iU4UIGrIIIHKKemeVq4r2E3JcZHn+MNQQ5ttPfTmE5+fi+qm0nr0 Pr45zATGq6KP9tN7HEEo9wa2Py65QBK5MSn4GpsQhX/a9qvCC0YHeqbDarLWUC1JBS7q h387dJ4m7OPEKHuJuiaMJxN4xvoX8K7dRBj81MgtWLvWNFtR9ytXuCGCCAeyE3IEgW1G w9jug2XHUmDVPSjV95+KPTUP8HRCa3pIB8FIRQC06Lzut/0HVFWJu+zQoaZYntX6E9PC 0pZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1717161119; x=1717765919; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=D11NPhjDgZEZuIWOxX99PzMw9yBtzzjlGXOjEAybkME=; b=M0osY/KGvT4Z384lKdXXcsoT4HAR3chqY3c2qKvipTr1FP59LL/mXKDXvvVyZ3lpF2 3poMPmtqYoLMJb4vUObPZgudUnoT1i3uveHoSVT7IYqXS9bUxZ7w6BrBjeYt7H0nnECx g1+U/hb6QmgJRnxCG/FN9QfrkkSjefLfXUHSHlf6rRBKgsW9EByA3cU5JaSsVCtYpdAF X7qWk3gIQisKsEJZTmm7K4OzGzFVoxz9aCb4Z1hilEH0nNHEHnYg34pVntcDnUoQJtC4 OdpyaLWFp3HRsui/drzDQzCc2DwIE7WgQ/l/n5BcyENEKEgqyqYRvQI1HuRlQrnbR3HU GRjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzgFH3r2WaG6EqrrlQzHMwrwgd8vGenrrS1Oxp95G2D0uFABQ5y k5Psrm5Y0W8BFWwoX1LY5GoUw7/jb5f6MyQvmplIRALc34RaSJ3a X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF9FZF2A2XLtyTJePH1P7jL0C/ty0+3Mdruza2hHPOcQl8lv5Fkwm9X7qBorr0+JHg5L21/vw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:7241:b0:a67:6bdb:10be with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a681fc5ce73mr192675066b.11.1717161118733; Fri, 31 May 2024 06:11:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple ([89.249.45.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-a685e3cccd4sm57310166b.179.2024.05.31.06.11.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 31 May 2024 06:11:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <27F09B21-8FB0-41C8-A169-E3C966C0993F@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BF2B3643-8A07-4EAF-9E22-71E498D3AF88" Precedence: bulk list-help: list-post: List-Id: internals.lists.php.net Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.600.62\)) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Asymmetric Visibility, v2 Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 15:11:46 +0200 In-Reply-To: Cc: php internals To: Vincent de Lau References: <0a6a61cd-f203-4dea-a7f8-97e6b885c52d@app.fastmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.600.62) From: claude.pache@gmail.com (Claude Pache) --Apple-Mail=_BF2B3643-8A07-4EAF-9E22-71E498D3AF88 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Le 30 mai 2024 =C3=A0 12:16, Vincent de Lau a = =C3=A9crit : >=20 >>=20 >> We went through a bunch of syntax variations last year, including = "public >> private", "public:private", and "public private:set", plus a few = others. >> In an RCV poll, public private(set) was the favorite. (See link at = the end >> of the RFC.) It also allows for extension to other operations and = scopes, >> and for the short-hand syntax. Many of the other options did not = support >> those. Thus we stuck with the known syntax that had the most = flexibility >> and most support. >=20 > Would it make sense to do another RCV poll now that hooks are = accepted, after lengthy discussion over its syntax?=20 >=20 At the time the poll was conducted, it was already known that a hooks = RFC was in preparation, that could be compatible with either option, = syntax-wise. Now, we have hooks that are compatible with both options, = syntax-wise. I don=E2=80=99t think that would change the aesthetic = preferences of people. But now, we have indeed more information, namely detailed technical = information on how the two features (hooks and aviz) interact = effectively with references/arrays/readonly. At the time the poll was = conducted, I was *moderately* in favour of the Swift-style syntax, = mostly based on the general principle that things that are logically = orthogonal should be implemented as orthogonal. If the same poll is done = today, I will be *strongly* in favour of the Swift-style syntax, because = I know more precisely how both features interact with arrays and = readonly. =E2=80=94Claude --Apple-Mail=_BF2B3643-8A07-4EAF-9E22-71E498D3AF88 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

Le 30 mai 2024 =C3=A0 12:16, Vincent de Lau = <vincent@delau.nl> a =C3=A9crit :


We went = through a bunch of syntax variations last year, including = "public
private", "public:private", and "public private:set", plus a = few others.
In an RCV poll, public private(set) was the favorite. = (See link at the end
of the RFC.)  It also allows for extension = to other operations and scopes,
and for the short-hand syntax. =  Many of the other options did not support
those.  Thus we = stuck with the known syntax that had the most flexibility
and most = support.

Would = it make sense to do another RCV poll now that hooks are accepted, after = lengthy discussion over its syntax? 


At the time the poll was = conducted, it was already known that a hooks RFC was in preparation, = that could be compatible with either option, syntax-wise. Now, we have = hooks that are compatible with both options, syntax-wise. I don=E2=80=99t = think that would change the aesthetic preferences of = people.

But now, we have indeed more = information, namely detailed technical information on how the two = features (hooks and aviz) interact effectively with = references/arrays/readonly. At the time the poll was conducted, I was = *moderately* in favour of the Swift-style syntax, mostly based on the = general principle that things that are logically orthogonal should be = implemented as orthogonal. If the same poll is done today, I will be = *strongly* in favour of the Swift-style syntax, because I know more = precisely how both features interact with arrays and = readonly.

=E2=80=94Claude

= --Apple-Mail=_BF2B3643-8A07-4EAF-9E22-71E498D3AF88--