Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64350 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 15093 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2012 21:25:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Dec 2012 21:25:52 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.193 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.193 smtp193.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.193] ([67.192.241.193:54218] helo=smtp193.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 0E/BE-33799-E5FD0D05 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:25:52 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp19.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id CDFF83C84B3; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:25:47 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp19.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 65CAA3C8334; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:25:47 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <50D0DF5A.5030003@sugarcrm.com> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 13:25:46 -0800 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Stogov CC: PHP Internals References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Complete traits redesign for 5.5 From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > I'm going to take a deep look into trait implementation and provide a > better solution for 5.5. > The current implementation is really wired and makes a lot of troubles for > maintenance and each new fix, makes new troubles :( > I'm really sorry, I didn't pay enough attention to treats before 5.4 > release :( > > The new solution may significantly change implementation and even behavior > in some cases (e.g https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=62069). Thanks for looking into it! Could you write some description of what functionality changes are needed and why? An RFC would be helpful, so we have a definite reference and instead of going through all bug comments and risking missing something. BTW, could you after that take a look at bug #63462? It's kind of weird, and part of it with protected seems to be a bug (same property name is used both mangled and unmangled when using guards) but I'm not sure yet what to do with it. I may have time to look into it on the weekend, but would appreciate second opinion. Thanks, -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227