Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:123613
Feedback-ID: id5114917:Fastmail
Message-ID: <936e1aa3-48cc-4552-9f68-676ebcdeb596@rwec.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2024 14:53:08 +0100
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Static class
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <0cf69a14-f1b5-4077-9d91-d7b579485eec@scriptfusion.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <0cf69a14-f1b5-4077-9d91-d7b579485eec@scriptfusion.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: imsop.php@rwec.co.uk ("Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]")

On 15/06/2024 12:16, Bilge wrote:
>
> I want to introduce the `static` keyword at the class declaration 
> level. That is, the following would be valid: `static class Foo {}`. 


This has been proposed before, and was rejected at vote. It was nearly 
10 years ago, so opinions may have changed, but it would be worth 
reading through the prior discussion to anticipate or counter the 
objections raised, and avoid re-treading the same ground.

- RFC: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/abstract_final_class
- Pre-vote discussion threads: https://externals.io/message/79211 and 
https://externals.io/message/79338
- Final vote thread: https://externals.io/message/79601

Searching my list archive, I find that it came up again a few months 
ago, which I'd entirely forgotten: https://externals.io/message/121717

Slightly tangential, but some of the same discussion also came up on 
these rather lengthy threads about "static class constructors": 
https://externals.io/message/84602 and https://externals.io/message/85779


Regards,

-- 
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]