Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:124357
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 17:43:59 +0000
To: Levi Morrison <levi.morrison@datadoghq.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Improve language coherence for the behaviour of offsets and containers
Message-ID: <orcmVjjWQ5yjKcM6e1m2TUKEzkbynYyo6Rhg9yGdgdgJ5IIJTNd7qlEwVO_r2-AdvAASnmWDaYEc1zT0hOAbEtHV5vmf8gTbuJGTDe2BTmo=@gpb.moe>
In-Reply-To: <CAAKU0u=4HpTEWANwuWwgCVtv5czumoF3EkWJby0f-_CpF+myKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mhbeurk_htxbQxzIEs98wQoR8Xczf-L7L8aCAIVhATD7wQiEUJwpAYxYS-llyac0pN761mnQJfpVQcDUoXAgasaWpWylpt6LE-I2oM4zrbk=@gpb.moe> <EE-aMte3i-_DTmSrqDgoaRPATmjLUcLt-k31baT8lqqCsrzIy0UsOyKo9rlBs51gWKUK7e7X3VYDuJmxhd6bxOGe52k8ITQgoN0_AE0RnoY=@gpb.moe> <CAAKU0umROg0TLOnA0dLpXVOLfV7rOjUhKaYXouTx-dV=CDtR3Q@mail.gmail.com> <jBKyhPrjSX1cYulRZtMOtcc96dae07Vpn3gg56sEX3V8nB5PNiI8IYE0hkbQZDOlH3gCLm93ofbh3Y4y9CCZ6-pD6ql0zUS6JDA6S2EJqGU=@gpb.moe> <CAAKU0u=4HpTEWANwuWwgCVtv5czumoF3EkWJby0f-_CpF+myKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 96993444:user:proton
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: internals@gpb.moe ("Gina P. Banyard")

On Wednesday, 10 July 2024 at 16:22, Levi Morrison <levi.morrison@datadoghq=
.com> wrote:

> > Everything considered, I still do not think changing the name of the ap=
pend() method is a good idea, will it hurt adoption in the short term for s=
ome classes, yes, but I prefer this than having a large part of the ecosyst=
em needing to create an alias just for some weird cases.
>=20
>=20
> I don't fully understand the issue with aliases. Could you elaborate
> on that? Would calling the method instead of direct aliasing avoid
> whatever the issue is?

I don't think this would solve the issue, as it is not required for a child=
 class that extends said method to call the parent.

Let's use a class that extends SplObjectStorage as an example: https://3v4l=
.org/l913b
Our custom class overwrites the behaviour of the contains() method without =
calling the parent method.
As such, the behaviour of isset() becomes incorrect.

And even if we make offsetExists() call the contains() method, nothing actu=
ally prevents the child class from overwriting the offsetExists() method in=
stead of the contains() one.
In which case, the contains() method would still be the original SplObjectS=
torage one.

One could also just extend both methods and have them differ in implementat=
ions.

I really believe there isn't a good way to solve this problem other than no=
t having any aliases within class methods.

Best regards,

Gina P. Banyard