Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:78959
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.172 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <546BBCC3.4090603@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 21:40:19 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <546B0F62.1090705@gmail.com> <CAH-PCH6C+WjMQZkAGE8mqG=vc=gUxwX=G4VZM1P9LSMxHAM21Q@mail.gmail.com> <546B9739.6060904@gmail.com> <m4g9mj$j0g$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <m4g9mj$j0g$1@ger.gmane.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Default constructors
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

On 18/11/2014 20:20, Alexander Kurilo wrote:
> Does it *really* make sense for PHP? What if that parent class 
> 'Animal' from your example introduces a constructor that accepts, say, 
> both `$owner` and `$what` as mandatory arguments? 
> `parent::__construct()` call in a descendant will appear broken 
> (unintentionally, I suppose), won't it?

If you introduce a mandatory parameter to *any* function, method, or 
constructor, existing calls to that function, method, or constructor 
will be broken.

A class with no defined constructor already behaves as if its 
constructor had no arguments when using "new", so introducing a 
constructor with mandatory arguments is already a breaking change.

-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]