Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65043
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50FC0DD5.8000206@zerocue.com>
References: <50F840F4.7080704@zerocue.com>
	<50F87A23.60808@mrclay.org>
	<50F8A88D.1000409@zerocue.com>
	<CAL+t6cE4FGLpbYQfzkL=gzLefBefk2ntJDEhbiKx9niYBsh7uw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF+90c8sBmP-1gbkSNpt_zveZxzrC-pDwHjohTDkSmkns2KXog@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL+t6cFU9Pt0+36cb=pQf6hdxG3wV9zj2PRCdpG=JaE5Lf-k-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<50FC0DD5.8000206@zerocue.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:39:14 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL+t6cEuhi4Z86G-A21b-eqrJQ-jHP=CVZBSWrk1hgZT6cjeTA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Clint Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com>
Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c6c12979d8c04d3ba25f5
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5
From: theanomaly.is@gmail.com (Sherif Ramadan)

--089e013c6c12979d8c04d3ba25f5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Clint Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com> wrote:

>
> On 1/20/2013 7:35 AM, Sherif Ramadan wrote:
>
>   Now $surface shows us the following from var_dump....
>
>  object(surface)#1 (3) {
>   ["area"]=>
>   NULL
>   ["width"]=>
>   int(4)
>   ["height"]=>
>   int(2)
> }
>
> Sounds like a reasonable approach to me... var_dump()
>
> 1) Should not invoke the getters..
>

I can agree this since the side effects could be unpredictable (as in the
case of an accessor implementing an actual method rather than dealing with
with any values -- the performance loss is unjustified)


> 2) Should indicate that they are property accessors (perhaps not even show
> the underlying guarded property?)
>

That is a sensible approach to me.


>
> Possibly:
>
>  object(surface)#1 (3) {
>   ["area":accessor]=>
>   NULL
>   ["width":accessor]=>
>   int(4)
>   ["height":accessor]=>
>   int(2)
> }
>
> This could easily be changed if nobody had any further disagreements with
> this?
>
> Only issue I could see would be existing code that may parse var_dump()
> might break if it wasn't written to accept something other that
> private/protected...
>

I think that one should rely on serialize or json_* serialization methods
or parsing data structures as opposed to var_dump output, since var_dump
doesn't always provide parseable output. Look at the output of DateTime
objects from var_dump or DateInterval objects, which have changed a bit
over 5.2 -> 5.3 and other objects like DOMDocument, which at one point did
not have any meaningful var_dump output at all.


>
>
> --
> -Clint
>

--089e013c6c12979d8c04d3ba25f5--