Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:47631
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.216 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:cc:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=Kas3S9rh04XkuYwKeUWptIdyeqmkhj9+QjqoSZ1fZ575scPFItcm3+s9F+Bra04jlZ
         yFf4ptXCU074uYl3vdRLqkFnYnOd0FY+67kEk4VVO0fO5cfHWHArLomjL0F3CF24/Ua/
         oP4Fga8xS2EWZG5xwM9eRUNsNW3GdoaXwtGKc=
Message-ID: <4BABF123.4050102@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 01:26:27 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: internals@lists.php.net
References: <4BA0DF61.1010907@easyflirt.com> <4BA0E39C.7020600@gmail.com>	 <4BA0E9E8.8000404@easyflirt.com>	 <e666c3891003171419t35b0df06v6c1d502c270154de@mail.gmail.com>	 <4BA1DB19.1080608@easyflirt.com>	 <660eb66f1003180224g5662ba1dtb123c3ee88a3a3e5@mail.gmail.com>	 <4BA25919.8090805@easyflirt.com> <e666c3891003181956j7c64948cq5ca791be21ab1dbc@mail.gmail.com> <4BA37E11.9080403@gmail.com> <4BA7C9CF.1000008@zend.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BA7C9CF.1000008@zend.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Assign array with __get
From: ionut.g.stan@gmail.com ("Ionut G. Stan")

Hi,

On 3/22/2010 21:49, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> I guess what Mathieu is trying to say is that this:
>> ...is inconsistent with this:
>
> This is because you're doing it wrong. If you intend to modify the
> property, return it by-ref. Saying the magic "consistency" word doesn't
> change that.
>
>> Now, I'm not really sure this is that bad, as there may be use cases
>> where one would like to return different values every time __get is
>> called. And, as I wrote in a previous email, there are ways to work
>> around this inconsistency by using return by reference, so everybody can
>> be happy. I think.
>
> It's not "the way around this inconsistency" - it's how it is supposed
> to work.

So, what's the reasoning behind this design decision? Why is it supposed 
to work like this and not the other way around?

-- 
Ionut G. Stan
I'm under construction  |  http://blog.igstan.ro/