Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:125776
Message-ID: <52fde944-27bb-44ea-8b48-cf3d033cc526@jnvsor.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 18:54:58 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Asymmetric visibility is a BC break
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <CAPyeZ4N8GMiLNVCDGxdofcy6txBhng_i2UKUGpiS5bnZ-YcYvA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <CAPyeZ4N8GMiLNVCDGxdofcy6txBhng_i2UKUGpiS5bnZ-YcYvA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-mijn.host-Spamfilter-Domain: mijn.host
X-mijn.host-Spamfilter-Username: 2a03:5180:7:2:f264:726d:beae:1/112
Authentication-Results: mijn.host; auth=pass smtp.auth=2a03:5180:7:2:f264:726d:beae:1/112@mijn.host
X-mijn.host-Spamfilter-Outgoing-Class: ham
X-mijn.host-Spamfilter-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.28)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Pt3MvcO5N4iKaDQ5O6lkdGlMVN6RH8bjRMzItlySaT9TlGURWsCHNLnLGqGbjwRfPUtbdvnXkggZ
 3YnVId/Y5jcf0yeVQAvfjHznO7+bT5ysVpdc69k5cRExqclQnUjJ0xCugIxICoR4SK4EpYmU4+fH
 zJ6mVE7ewsipSVIfs4bmIh1cLCioJcmlJTcg2+IBABHVTw1lV42ob3hDgXVUNd9a53XVj4zauHkA
 5dPfA2liT1v1qMyQrE//74nL7QExQ3/ALdD8atGIw6cCqw07qgRo87oeATC+hGtbNyLqD79d1FgH
 UTYLOfKNI261jSzBP06AR5g2UA3HqsYlcMd+kU3FrKlNunbw3GCGM2ilT87d7j7SBq6MwVj6lFM1
 1vq969CCDfOKd5FAllGsCCg+XysEJGdAAQBUErof8jiNd96dw+XGlIW1bb6iLQaqIs5B5d+hLlId
 aCW6xwdNo4OxtwDY4SpTbUhcsSYcTjOB+M5x3dBtceKX2dWiEm+7oHm9xBEeGmns8QeFADnQDTrf
 rserYKXCRGR18OfTWrHpf6kV0xJ411PPMPVAmEodS0dereVcnHDGPTHJJ/+YucHWLMPH12Bh87aa
 4YfZs104p87OifVovUq7COge14oi3y0trSOIPpeqwlm2NDGXIJ2x7Aw67nLpfFALWaP7S/uCvcMs
 T3AdBmqsjHpFvIRGv3QGFGGN9tupvM6WO2Ft1gH+FXJq+ds6gSK6Fy7SIDHaqAQlA5yvuKg/VrQW
 W0t2gQb8VPATXlXOfRp8+eB3Yg8HXdFEFdiL9rNiZMnOwdYHLGEeFcyQ7VJExC7Q4eRzWD0n0z6b
 halFEM/pjPCQA+BAlk5KEOURO6sk/Aa437Ns/uqKg2woREVyMtyJFnDS+FlbYiTaDgmqHFunKeGX
 Y820J73xAKY/MLkOzWHmShbae47fRmo+6HsrDTfTk2WASpxA9hnDZXV2CQwQLTmDKYV0FLstv/fQ
 2PQkRKCR50pYUO1+pvlHhV6a5QjptwQBGybQa79B8ofWhEiU8433QvQjH6EsmgNU80KTDQcWwe0S
 4mArfQ+tROiiWG4K9sxAvhAB5OBSN81tpz7T+tfAQe1JK2MgYyDjTfyYIHhsZr9+GI4gfKNLQ72k
 P6B93hdHavZ5
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@filter101.mijn.host
From: jnv@jnvsor.net (Jonathan Vollebregt)

On 10/9/24 5:01 PM, Valentin Udaltsov wrote:
> While not explicitly stated in changelogs, this was a BC break,
> because a changed semantic of smth that existed before is a BC break.

Since readonly was only introduced in 8.1 this wasn't a BC break. You 
couldn't have a readonly property before so no pre-existing code would 
break.

> Did it break anything? Of course it did! See:

Again, none of these would break if using 8.0 code. They broke because 
someone added a PHP 8.1 readonly property to existing code and then 
tried reflecting/hydrating/serializing it with code that was only tested 
on 8.0.

Now what _could_ be a BC break is when they made a load of internal PHP 
properties readonly but afaik that only happened on virtual properties 
that behaved that way already (Think DOMNode stuff)

While I agree that `is(Public|Protected|Private)(Get|Set)` is a clearer 
solution, nothing about the current implementation breaks BC.

- Jonathan