Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:23480 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 68739 invoked by uid 1010); 16 May 2006 22:08:24 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 68724 invoked from network); 16 May 2006 22:08:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 16 May 2006 22:08:24 -0000 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: andi@zend.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 80.74.107.235 mail.zend.com Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from ([80.74.107.235:38880] helo=mail.zend.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id B0/C4-19568-75D4A644 for ; Tue, 16 May 2006 18:08:24 -0400 Received: (qmail 1163 invoked from network); 16 May 2006 22:08:10 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ANDI-NOTEBOOK.zend.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 16 May 2006 22:08:10 -0000 Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20060516150743.03974be8@zend.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 15:08:16 -0700 To: Jason Garber Cc: Marcus Boerger ,Zeev Suraski , PHP internals In-Reply-To: <1566856608.20060516175908@ionzoft.com> References: <785810036.20060511193536@ionzoft.com> <44647B7A.2070301@php.net> <932738738.20060513112734@marcus-boerger.de> <837405862.20060513223403@ionzoft.com> <36828701.20060514110529@marcus-boerger.de> <31269879.20060514221212@marcus-boerger.de> <1327845846.20060514222154@marcus-boerger.de> <1562034641.20060516203354@marcus-boerger.de> <7.0.1.0.2.20060516235201.090f10a8@zend.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060516142654.02c78380@zend.com> <596643859.20060516233753@marcus-boerger.de> <7.0.1.0.2.20060516144030.039abe98@zend.com> <1566856608.20060516175908@ionzoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans) Yeah you can take a look at internal functions/classes that operate on objects and see whether the readonly semantics might need to work in some of those cases. Thanks for the offer! At 02:59 PM 5/16/2006, Jason Garber wrote: >Hello Andi, > > Your request for edge condition research is an excellent one. We've > just been through a hellish couple weeks of QA failures (at my > company) which just *underscore* your point. The last thing any of > us needs is a broken PHP. > > That being said, is there anything I can do to help us find this > stuff out? > >-- >Best regards, > Jason mailto:jason@ionzoft.com > >Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 5:41:31 PM, you wrote: > >AG> Where would readable be enforced? Would it try and prevent getting >AG> references to it? Are there any internal functions/classes which need >AG> fixing to honor readable? > >AG> I think these answers would really be helpful. > >AG> Thanks. > >AG> Andi > >AG> At 02:37 PM 5/16/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote: > >>Hello Andi, > >> > >> that is why most here already switched to "public readable". > >> > >>best regards > >>marcus > >> > >>Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 11:31:14 PM, you wrote: > >> > >> > I can't quite explain it but for me the ability to work-around > >> > private with methods which are able to access the private variable, > >> > is different than marking a property as read-only but it not being > >> > read-only in all semantics. Probably because private variables do > >> > often have getters and setters, whereas something which is marked as > >> > read-only (like a harddrive) tends to be read-only always. > >> > >> > Andi > >> > >> > At 02:08 PM 5/16/2006, Zeev Suraski wrote: > >> >>>However, the reason i write this mail is that you said there could be > >> >>>problems. Well this is deply integrated in the handlers and they don't > >> >>>let you out. In other words if this stuff is not working then the whole > >> >>>PHP 5+ object model is broken. Or in other words, if this is > broken alot > >> >>>of other stuff regarding object handling is already broken. > >> >> > >> >>You're probably right about this one. You can already return a > >> >>reference to a private variable today and change it. Andi - did you > >> >>mean something else? > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>Best regards, > >> Marcus