Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:130207
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2026 13:35:57 +0100
To: Ilija Tovilo <tovilo.ilija@gmail.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Readonly Variables
In-Reply-To: <CAPyj-LB-ShZMswSFBjF4dHgn9xf4CJJsHODu7R-bgxq3WgphDw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPyj-LB-ShZMswSFBjF4dHgn9xf4CJJsHODu7R-bgxq3WgphDw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <af140e85e8308fa4d9c775519d9b5873@bastelstu.be>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: tim@bastelstu.be (=?UTF-8?Q?Tim_D=C3=BCsterhus?=)

Hi

Am 2026-02-25 15:41, schrieb Ilija Tovilo:
> - Without runtime tracking of readonly (and the concept of block
> scoping) every variable name could only be declared once in a function.

After thinking about the RFC for a few days, Ilija is making a good 
point here:

I find “block scoping” a necessary prerequisite to have local readonly 
variables (and also local typed variables). Being able to define a 
readonly variable within an `if()` and thus making it *conditionally* 
readonly (or conditionally typed) is going to invite confusion. It is 
the obviously correct behavior with the current semantics of PHP, 
though.

I nevertheless appreciate the effort that went into the RFC, particular 
with the attention to detail pointing out all “edge cases”. It made it 
really easy to think about the proposal, because there was no need to 
make assumptions about how it's supposed to work.

Best regards
Tim Düsterhus