Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64533 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 64326 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2013 22:30:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 4 Jan 2013 22:30:02 -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 67.192.241.139 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.139 smtp139.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.139] ([67.192.241.139:60748] helo=smtp139.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id B5/D3-38386-7E757E05 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 17:30:01 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp30.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id E16CF3485AA; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:29:56 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp30.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id C7DD53480B3; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:29:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <50E757E1.8060803@sugarcrm.com> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 14:29:53 -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: Clint Priest CC: Levi Morrison , Nikita Popov , PHP internals References: <50E6F2EB.20108@zerocue.com> In-Reply-To: <50E6F2EB.20108@zerocue.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Alternative typehinting syntax for accessors From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > This shouldn't be an issue because it is not possible to set the > property without going through the setter, which would be a type hinted > accessor function. It is possible, if this property's guard is set. Since guard works for all code called from inside the setter, if setter is doing something not trivial (meaning, calls any functions, explicitly or implicitly) it is possible to set the property directly. Since the value you are getting is defined by the getter, there are no guarantees there too. So effectively, unless both getter and setter are implicit, this does not give you anything compared to the typed setter. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227