Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:91414
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain adamharvey.name designates 209.85.217.176 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: adam@adamharvey.name
In-Reply-To: <97.82.11730.D8C3FC65@pb1.pair.com>
References: <CA+kxMuTHbsYAXe+J+jrFz+ZeguacEyUxCUpFJE8jMee_5+u_5g@mail.gmail.com>
 <97.82.11730.D8C3FC65@pb1.pair.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 10:17:38 -0800
Message-ID: <CADajX4B8hOCaw8g1x-QWQ9K2YDixUJHfWHTCBri7HcSQtpLfBg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] Callable constructors
From: aharvey@php.net (Adam Harvey)

On 25 February 2016 at 09:40, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote:
> Instead of changing __construct to implicitly create the object it acts on
> in certain contexts, I would suggest a simpler approach: add a magic ::new()
> static method that exists on all classes (think ::class, although that is a
> constant). Foo::new() would work identically to new Foo(), and would solve
> your use case. It would be more intuitive, I think, and it avoids the
> problems of changing __construct.

(Un?)fortunately, new() is a valid method name for userland classes in PHP 7.0.

Adam