Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:69384
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.177 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <524530F4.7010806@php.net>
References: <524530F4.7010806@php.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 11:59:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CALtuQzCLxS8-22AaOHAAUiUhpwttbGyXNjYh_RPK5PXvJDndKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: gooh@php.net
Cc: PHP internals list <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01419acc76c49504e75a8e12
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Automatic Property Initialization
From: krebs.seb@gmail.com (Sebastian Krebs)

--089e01419acc76c49504e75a8e12
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

2013/9/27 Gordon Oheim <gooh@php.net>

>
> Independent but related to
>
> - https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**constructor-promotion<https://wiki.php.net/rfc/constructor-promotion>
>
> I wrote an RFC about porting Dart-like Automatic Property Initialization
> to PHP. Nikic was so generous to provide an initial PoC for it (since I
> don't do C):
>
> - https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**automatic_property_**initialization<https://wiki.php.net/rfc/automatic_property_initialization>
> - https://github.com/php/php-**src/pull/474<https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/474>
>
> I am proposing this for inclusion in 5.6.
> There is no BC breaks afaik.
>
> The RFC suggests to allow for $this->foo as Constructor arguments to make
> the boilerplate code for property assignments in constructors superfluous.
> This is the core feature subject to discussion.
>

I simply don't like it to have a concrete method without body. Either
abstract without body, or concrete _with_ body. In this case it would mean
to have an empty body

public function __construct ($this->x) {}

but I think that wouldn't be too bad :)


>
> I've spoken to about two dozen developers outside internals prior to
> suggesting this RFC and the general response was positive and the core
> feature unanimously deemed useful. Moreover, in the previous discussion
> about constructor promotion there was some messages suggesting that the now
> proposed syntactic approach is more preferred than using visibility
> keywords.
>
> The RFC also suggests some related syntactic sugar like Methodless
> Constructors, an alternate and shorter syntax, as well as making this
> available in the entire class scope. These are things I am not sure of so I
> am hoping for comments on these. Should this RFC get into the voting phase,
> we should by then have either promoted or eliminated these options through
> discussion.
>
> Thanks and Regards, Gordon
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>


-- 
github.com/KingCrunch

--089e01419acc76c49504e75a8e12--