Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:63344
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain beberlei.de from 209.85.217.170 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE485612B4EFE@MBX202.domain.local>
References: <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE485612B3B48@MBX202.domain.local>
	<5073328D.5000002@gmail.com>
	<50735165.8010703@aaronholmes.net>
	<CAEPJdu=pRSDRD68t3o7XVbWRo-FvA07Wr+bzM_bwOXkwfiMxng@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACxA8bkF0EHDs3As=kMcg-BahRfBK6A5i7B9TdRc_SweCsv23A@mail.gmail.com>
	<9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE485612B4353@MBX202.domain.local>
	<CACxA8b=wbHN_mRomH25Jr+i9BeTzj=VTGfPe_T8igjzCsMNn_Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<760ab4f994a78a846cf86aafda71e0e2@mohiva.com>
	<CALtuQzAH-=ePssPi-yUcXghpUhO6jOH4oDhDtPEFVj9bRf1VLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE485612B4EFE@MBX202.domain.local>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 10:03:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEPJdu=pyh7ADVoWfvEq7DruyTnQeWp_FUCSW9cBCROm7DaSNw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Clint Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04088ef55d906804cbc402a6
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Propety Accessors v1.1
From: kontakt@beberlei.de (Benjamin Eberlei)

--f46d04088ef55d906804cbc402a6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Clint Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com> wrote:

> Okay, I would like this to be the last time there are revisions to this
> RFC.
>
> To sum up the last few days of conversations, I have these down as points
> of contention:
>
> 1.  Accessor functions should not be present on the object and callable
> directly, for example, $o->__getHours() should not be allowed.
> 2.  Preferred syntax for accessors should be "public set($value) { ... }"
> with no "magic" $value (with possible type hinting)
> 3.  Automatically implemented get; set; with auto-backing field should be
> eliminated as this is not necessary for PHP and is confusing most everyone.
>

This is actually the most useful for me imho, why is it confusing? It
creates a property that is a pure getter/setter what 90% of the properties
need. It would be a shame to see this go.


> 4.  read-only / write-only keywords, keep them or get rid of them?  There
> is no directly suitable replacement but I believe a private final set() { }
> will take care of it, even though it much more verbose.
>

+1 for private final. Its already there, why not use it.


> 5.  Error handling for thrown exceptions should be made more appropriate
> for accessors
> 6.  The "truth" of reflection.  Should it reveal details internal to how
> PHP works on the inside or should it reflect the way PHP presents it as
> options?
>

The Reflection API has to be such, that I can code-generate a stub of the
class just from the Reflection API.That means that we have to have access
to the getter/setter methods of the property, otherwise we couldnt generate
a stub for "public $Hours { public set(DateTime $time) { ... }}"


>
> Did I miss anything?
>
>
> I will come up with some way for people to vote on the issues at hand and
> we can cast our votes and be done with it, then I will finish the project
> and get it out the door.
>
> -Clint
>

--f46d04088ef55d906804cbc402a6--