Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:95544 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 24131 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2016 19:13:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 1 Sep 2016 19:13:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=php@fleshgrinder.com; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=php@fleshgrinder.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain fleshgrinder.com from 212.232.25.164 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: php@fleshgrinder.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.232.25.164 mx208.easyname.com Received: from [212.232.25.164] ([212.232.25.164:45240] helo=mx208.easyname.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id B8/06-47600-5CD78C75 for ; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 15:13:09 -0400 Received: from cable-81-173-132-156.netcologne.de ([81.173.132.156] helo=[192.168.178.20]) by mx.easyname.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bfXQA-0006q0-6p for internals@lists.php.net; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 19:13:06 +0000 Reply-To: internals@lists.php.net References: <167d6432-e4d6-d87d-5d31-d3d82a8de4ce@fleshgrinder.com> <99F80C06-654D-4109-BE07-2FA5B1073E5D@ez.no> To: internals@lists.php.net Message-ID: <4f54308a-4a69-2e6b-2ed0-51d4336d1cd4@fleshgrinder.com> Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 21:12:51 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7Ab7KsXEqGbfRDDr7kfpo4oDTocHe2DUQ" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC - Immutable classes From: php@fleshgrinder.com (Fleshgrinder) --7Ab7KsXEqGbfRDDr7kfpo4oDTocHe2DUQ Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Q1hohLQUTTsX3HchmbNKdmkoGDiamCCu4"; protected-headers="v1" From: Fleshgrinder Reply-To: internals@lists.php.net To: internals@lists.php.net Message-ID: <4f54308a-4a69-2e6b-2ed0-51d4336d1cd4@fleshgrinder.com> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC - Immutable classes References: <167d6432-e4d6-d87d-5d31-d3d82a8de4ce@fleshgrinder.com> <99F80C06-654D-4109-BE07-2FA5B1073E5D@ez.no> In-Reply-To: --Q1hohLQUTTsX3HchmbNKdmkoGDiamCCu4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 9/1/2016 3:49 PM, Silvio Mariji=C4=87 wrote: > Hi Andre, >=20 > Here is RFC https://wiki.php.net/rfc/immutability and you have link to > implementation github. Any suggestions and feedback are more then welco= me. >=20 > Best, > Silvio >=20 Hi Silvio, very nice work you guys did here! :) Abstract classes are not mentioned at all in the RFC. However, there is a test case from which it is clear that abstract classes cannot be immutable. Are there any reasons for this restrictions? What about array and resource values? Not mentioned in the RFC. The fact that cloning is not possible should also be extended in the RFC. I mean, it's clear to me but maybe not to others. Remember that the RFC is the main source of information for the feature (e.g. to generate documentation). Why the restrictions that all properties of an immutable class that take objects must be immutable too? It's clear why an immutable property must contain an immutable class but the inheritance from the class to the properties is not consistent with how things work. An immutable class might want to contain an internal cache (e.g. flyweight pattern). immutable final class Flyweight { private static $instances =3D []; public immutable $value; private function __construct($value) { $this->value =3D $value; } public static function ENUM_ORD() { if (isset(self::$instances[1]) =3D=3D=3D false) { self::$instances[1] =3D new self(1); } return self::$instances[1]; } } $o1 =3D Flyweight::ENUM_ORD(); $o2 =3D Flyweight::ENUM_ORD(); var_dump($o1 =3D=3D=3D $o2); // bool(true) Note that we could add the restriction that an immutable class that should be used in a threading context must contain only immutable properties in the future when the need arises. However, for now I do not see the need to inherit the modifier from the class to its properties and I see use cases where the developer wants more control. The test cases cover the most stuff but not everything and could be extended. There are other things with the PR but I will check it out and create a PR against your branch with that so you can review it. (Might take a while so bare with me.) The RFC contains several grammatical issues. I could help you with that too if you want. There is a lot of diff noise in the ext/tokenizer/tokenizer_data.c file. --=20 Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger --Q1hohLQUTTsX3HchmbNKdmkoGDiamCCu4-- --7Ab7KsXEqGbfRDDr7kfpo4oDTocHe2DUQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXyH2/AAoJEOKkKcqFPVVrL/wQAKsfaNrXpLcoUr8jNznhmr6s p8kuWvmzHTOT8j2Hv+bahC17tBgkibmJ6A2RiUeI/hKrhukNxOn59GEes9QQ1ybx j+B/uhjlMVCwwCKH01Y9xy4JQ7f26ZzgWvqb4ttPP9ZN/VNSXanoq6olpTaIdSzo b2wkxgNpQDJSPZavD7Wz+EJpvyGKLZxH+2fUpdecmRFESshBHdSGhTbX5YXtNOfW KZfBhKvs2pANWWdM+lPJihjcuiLSJhSpXeCUK0oHqrEzjZPsCDSVeLebbuyZaTRj w1gMCbuTgzu7P7PRA7qeq84cEm96G6dXNl5MAzM/qeMeJ4IOK3uy8ejy6U5uKPCO mv8vraZEYdB9jVfwBmBCKNemSsCze91XhEyMV2ErOXLTJLrfOQU3dpbRZKKl1gPG nQZt3mq1V3n/PD+79FBEB1prbrhzFyATzQ8pwG6fXBuE3sOYNCUuvcQITyWL9wI6 pssSdd0SJUtIxlboP7x3azt+s2SJWyWb7JTJK+dQulSU8QMa0u3j9uvMmv7IviWP CPvgLTYNLHUEAtzgok18v7D+vWPt6Nt++RsT/WdeWQNox7Vb3+AFQFGbSoU8H6YD JBS6N4jG2wgmgXH27GoSEMdB1VRZhScq27I4khV9ZG/0I8jTqfCa6t6oKDok/+ia Cr14Z6Cc4JzkiqA1Bpk9 =Dr8v -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7Ab7KsXEqGbfRDDr7kfpo4oDTocHe2DUQ--