Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:124589
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOWwgpmbq5VRrZQvUXDsKiNK4r6+bFA4VxnjQ_U=h8T9r0o3DA@mail.gmail.com>
 <45847b93-02bf-459f-bcd2-81ba35a12c24@bastelstu.be> <CAOWwgpnt77-Sybzc3hcnFEui9t8wAv03NAov4xCK9ib_VRZ0JA@mail.gmail.com>
 <46bd4098-2936-4e46-98e9-fe55118325c2@bastelstu.be> <CAOWwgpkCy++W1C2t0PnkZ71S8vq1B734ZNPGw2-OHjmrwO3L4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <61ab36bc-b045-452a-84e0-87367d4c680e@bastelstu.be> <CAEPJduk6m1gdPOrsXYbsc+RLuHeEBav3pGwQO+PHs4UGGqtzhg@mail.gmail.com>
 <07e065f2-8f64-4bad-9a98-51f4eaf63ddb@app.fastmail.com> <CAOWwgpngQtg2NRW6M6RwgSH+OS1iipewHBmM5c36P2MxQGX78A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2a0a4650-c2c5-4c6d-ad3a-25365b3391b2@bastelstu.be> <CAOWwgpm9FLy_SNt7HLtJh5sxtfwjZMMN6pOKioDqsJc+GgD-sA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOWwgpnwoPH_rkJreh8v+X8WagzcCJ_puT1RWC0c717GMj5Onw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOWwgp=uwDebrx-=H8yP1Dgwf9ji=v_qagw9aAxbDJcPvCqKNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <bddba996-3204-4130-af21-ea375eeeaf22@bastelstu.be> <CAOWwgpkrrADHJGBj_=_MQn4XbGSgv3W4MuRHtZj1Tri5xJWiKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <a720377b-4f94-43ff-a4ce-1a5ed1d7b9ea@bastelstu.be>
In-Reply-To: <a720377b-4f94-43ff-a4ce-1a5ed1d7b9ea@bastelstu.be>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 17:40:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAP1Jc100qPV4OTPPDN9+5oBpbASVPD42ddcD=BLb=7KngNVk5A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Lazy Objects
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?= <tim@bastelstu.be>
Cc: Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com>, Rob Landers <rob@bottled.codes>, 
	=?UTF-8?Q?Benjamin_Au=C3=9Fenhofer?= <kontakt@beberlei.de>, 
	PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: arnaud.lb@gmail.com (Arnaud Le Blanc)

Hi Tim,

On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 4:47=E2=80=AFPM Tim D=C3=BCsterhus <tim@bastelstu.b=
e> wrote:
> I'm seeing there are some more changes and not just to the cloning
> section. I've went through the entire RFC once again and here are my
> (hopefully final) five remarks. They are only about textual
> clarification of some behaviors, I don't have any further semantic concer=
ns.

Thank you! We have updated the RFC accordingly.

> 5. In the explanation of
> "ReflectionClass::markLazyObjectAsInitialized()", it says:
>
> > Its behavior is the same as described for Ghost Objects in the
> > Initialization Sequence section, except that the initializer is not
> > called.
> >
>
> This means that calling `markLazyObjectAsInitialized()` on a lazy proxy
> turns it into a regular object of the proxy class, as if
> `newInstanceWithoutConstructor()` was used, right?

Yes, except for the value of properties that were already initialized.

Best Regards,
Arnaud