Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:125986
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <d603f372-5f58-4308-aba1-151c35f3aa94@app.fastmail.com> <68eba37e-1bfe-4509-af41-112bb196415c@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <68eba37e-1bfe-4509-af41-112bb196415c@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2024 12:56:56 +0100
Message-ID: <CABdc3WrWjH2zTTTtbbaS43-C+kJUeA5dpp_NcfosPfar04t4Pw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Records
To: Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
Cc: php internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000086ed18062742bb7c"
From: michal.brzuchalski@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Marcin_Brzuchalski?=)

--00000000000086ed18062742bb7c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Larry,

niedz., 17 lis 2024 o 08:24 Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
napisa=C5=82(a):

> ...
> I can see the benefit of an inline constructor.  Kotlin has something
> similar.  But I can see the benefit of it for all classes, even service
> classes, not just records.  (In Kotlin, it's used for service classes all
> the time.)
>

What visibility would you expect for inline constructor properties in
service classes?
For records it is clearly a public fields declaration, while for service
classes I'd expect private|protected - adding visibility increases the
boilerplate back to normal classes.


> The alternate creation syntax... OK, this one I can't really see a benefi=
t
> to, and Ilija already noted it may cause conflicts.
>

I agree, personally I'd see "new" keyword used like for normal classes
still feasible.


> I would far prefer assembling record-ish behavior myself, using the
> smaller parts above.  Eg:
>
> final readonly data class Point(int $x, int $y);
>
> "final" prevents extension.  "readonly" makes it immutable.  "data" gives
> it value-passing semantics.  Any class can use an inline constructor.
> "with" is designed to work automatically on all objects.  Boom, I've just
> assembled a Record out of its constituent parts, which also makes it easi=
er
> for others to learn what I'm doing, because the features opted-in to are
> explicit, not implicit.
>

It opens a bunch of concerns, questions like why would you use "data"
keyword without having "final"?
Although I like the "data" keyword very much.

Kind regards,
--
Micha=C5=82 Marcin Brzuchalski

--00000000000086ed18062742bb7c
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">Hi Larry,</div><br><div class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">niedz., 17 lis 2024 o 08:24=C2=
=A0Larry Garfield &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:larry@garfieldtech.com">larry@garfi=
eldtech.com</a>&gt; napisa=C5=82(a):<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,20=
4);padding-left:1ex">...<br>
I can see the benefit of an inline constructor.=C2=A0 Kotlin has something =
similar.=C2=A0 But I can see the benefit of it for all classes, even servic=
e classes, not just records.=C2=A0 (In Kotlin, it&#39;s used for service cl=
asses all the time.)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What visibility wo=
uld you expect for inline constructor properties in service classes?</div><=
div>For records it is clearly a public fields declaration, while for servic=
e classes I&#39;d expect private|protected - adding visibility increases th=
e boilerplate back to normal classes.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid =
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
The alternate creation syntax... OK, this one I can&#39;t really see a bene=
fit to, and Ilija already noted it may cause conflicts.<br></blockquote><di=
v><br></div><div>I agree, personally I&#39;d see &quot;new&quot;=C2=A0keywo=
rd used like for normal classes still feasible.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:=
1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
I would far prefer assembling record-ish behavior myself, using the smaller=
 parts above.=C2=A0 Eg:<br>
<br>
final readonly data class Point(int $x, int $y);<br>
<br>
&quot;final&quot; prevents extension.=C2=A0 &quot;readonly&quot; makes it i=
mmutable.=C2=A0 &quot;data&quot; gives it value-passing semantics.=C2=A0 An=
y class can use an inline constructor.=C2=A0 &quot;with&quot; is designed t=
o work automatically on all objects.=C2=A0 Boom, I&#39;ve just assembled a =
Record out of its constituent parts, which also makes it easier for others =
to learn what I&#39;m doing, because the features opted-in to are explicit,=
 not implicit.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It opens a bunch of conc=
erns, questions like why would you use &quot;data&quot; keyword without hav=
ing &quot;final&quot;?</div><div>Although I like the &quot;data&quot; keywo=
rd very much.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards,</div><div>--</di=
v><div>Micha=C5=82 Marcin Brzuchalski</div></div></div>

--00000000000086ed18062742bb7c--