Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:63550 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 8265 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2012 08:10:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 Oct 2012 08:10:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=amaury.bouchard@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=amaury.bouchard@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.213.42 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: amaury.bouchard@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.213.42 mail-yh0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.213.42] ([209.85.213.42:39673] helo=mail-yh0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 2D/4A-22055-75C52805 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 04:10:05 -0400 Received: by mail-yh0-f42.google.com with SMTP id o21so240087yho.29 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 01:09:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=UFprd+kkPVnw98i1eZPUc81vOhp3yRebyQgDrvDs9qw=; b=Dz8wE0naW2x8kM5Cqwsl4vw40xjLSs0tc8PsnXx1Ctan5wtbcMHchLMSC85gSXFNSZ KeBFbhuN/OJ6UNJjWiMAdAXvEy+zYUeKxToTXQktpNWaW5EedwpY7kQeHVGO2sUzl02q LJ3y1qObxPVoociYhSXyvh1ltymfDeEN+0q6FOtsod64y0Yg8mEqv2UY/+KqTafY/xQb e1hWktaG6hzbDgPpH0LDP8m81I3YS/Q4eIh5G3YKoX7sbBld9EfWJz96652AHb7BWBFh L4BqcGOFZJJrdcOKiiESzFzLUwamV8yyceX8LeVF9iU40eEYisAdE2pmemMdffSp647n nkSA== Received: by 10.101.139.29 with SMTP id r29mr1016764ann.60.1350720596125; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 01:09:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: amaury.bouchard@gmail.com Received: by 10.147.152.21 with HTTP; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 01:09:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE485612C2581@MBX214.domain.local> References: <9570D903A3BECE4092E924C2985CE485612C2581@MBX214.domain.local> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 10:09:35 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0ZJ39-MIqRHbcDaofrNSdYgSoJE Message-ID: To: Clint Priest Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d3cf2252a98f04cc7925fb Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Accessors v1.1 -> v1.2 Summary From: amaury@amaury.net (Amaury Bouchard) --0016e6d3cf2252a98f04cc7925fb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 read-only / write-only keywords "no equivalent replacement has been suggested" => ouch read-only => const write-only => shouldn't exists. A write-only accessor is just a method disguised in property. It's not a good idea to allow: $obj->prop = 3; when the meaning is: $obj->meth(3); 2012/10/20 Clint Priest > Hey everyone, seems like the conversations have died down and I've > attempted to go back through all of the emails and produce a 1.1 -> 1.2 > document which summarizes what I believe are decided, being debated, > issues, todos, etc. > > Pierre had pointed out that I had partially changed the "as-implemented" > document which no longer reflected what the fork implements. So... I have > reverted that document to the 1.1 version. > > For the TODO items I will start to tackle those which are not dependent > upon some undecided changes. > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/propertygetsetsyntax-as-implemented/change-requests > > Please take a look and lets continue the discussion. > > Lastly, in order to keep the discussions of this large change, can we > keep/maintain separate threads discussing each of the major points? For > example if you want to talk about the "internal accessor method > visibility", create an email chain like "Accessors v1.2 : internal accessor > method visibility" > > Hopefully we can keep the emails in each thread on topic. > > Thanks! > > -Clint > --0016e6d3cf2252a98f04cc7925fb--