Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:44178
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.209 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=qzXbXvkHVNxBAajCykHQXWcF78hCEEvXti01LHoPMl+JVOOtdwRJBwSAZ9k/P+03qj
         +BB1RjvPz3EWHa5SaDJUMCrh77i4rEeZNKXPtUjdxU5WyFZxg04quL0E0RShztKvH2kF
         CzPzSGVPN4VT+8L53+8MKp24Q6v1FwnjiGz0g=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C3C41E126FFA435DBF2D13F49520AA84@pc>
References: <3949706BB9424F7FAC5AC708A01119DB@pc>
	 <cd5680a20906040012j6ba30652ra7bfdb6b732e8970@mail.gmail.com>
	 <C3C41E126FFA435DBF2D13F49520AA84@pc>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:07:09 -0400
Message-ID: <68de37340906050607v205af5awe088e4094af814c7@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stan Vassilev <sv_forums@fmethod.com>
Cc: internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f629a4ef6251046b9991fb
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Test for edge cases with __get and property access 
	flags
From: oorza2k5@gmail.com (Eddie Drapkin)

--001485f629a4ef6251046b9991fb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I thought this was the expected behaviour as well and I am quite sure that
I've used it in an experiment (all class members private and _get() output
escapes them) that failed pretty miserably.  But I did think this was the
expected behavior.  Perhaps it ought to throw an E_STRICT?

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Stan Vassilev <sv_forums@fmethod.com> wrote:

>
>
>    3. When the caller tries to retrieve $object->foo, and foo is a
> private/protected member the caller has no access to, instead of an error,
> __get is called.
>
>    I'm not very sure the current behavior on item 3 is the best one (maybe
> error should be thrown regardless?), but freezing on either would be better
> than leaving it undefined :)
>
>
>  I always thought that this is the supposed behaviour. I believe I even
> relied on it in one of my projects
>
>
> Hi,
>
> If the community wants it like it is, then I'm just fine with that: as long
> as the test is committed, so that it doesn't change overnight. Any
> volunteers :)?
>
> Regards,
> Stan Vassilev

--001485f629a4ef6251046b9991fb--