Please allow an out of readonly properties

1 year ago by Karoly Negyesi — view source

unread

Hello,

If push comes to shove, private properties can be changed with reflection.

Readonly properties can't.

Please add a readonly toggle to reflection.

Thanks

Karoly Negyesi

1 year ago by Marco Pivetta — view source

unread

Terrible idea: reflection is mostly introspection tooling, and doesn't
really bend the rules of the type system, other than crossing scope (it
"sees" more).

Please consider designing your system to consider the constraints of
readonly properties, or design the constraints to fit your system instead.

Marco Pivetta

https://twitter.com/Ocramius

https://ocramius.github.io/

Hello,

If push comes to shove, private properties can be changed with reflection.

Readonly properties can't.

Please add a readonly toggle to reflection.

Thanks

Karoly Negyesi

1 year ago by Karoly Negyesi — view source

unread

I do not have the luxury of designing my own system. I am forced to use
upstream. I can't help it and given the history of private usage and the
refusal on relaxing them I do not see this improving with the readonly. At
all.

Terrible idea: reflection is mostly introspection tooling, and doesn't
really bend the rules of the type system, other than crossing scope (it
"sees" more).

Please consider designing your system to consider the constraints of
readonly properties, or design the constraints to fit your system instead.

Marco Pivetta

https://twitter.com/Ocramius

https://ocramius.github.io/

Hello,

If push comes to shove, private properties can be changed with reflection.

Readonly properties can't.

Please add a readonly toggle to reflection.

Thanks

Karoly Negyesi

1 year ago by Marco Pivetta — view source

unread

Talk to the designers then: bringing your own political issues up to the
programming language/tooling only makes it worse long-term, for everyone 😛

I do not have the luxury of designing my own system. I am forced to use
upstream. I can't help it and given the history of private usage and the
refusal on relaxing them I do not see this improving with the readonly. At
all.

Terrible idea: reflection is mostly introspection tooling, and doesn't
really bend the rules of the type system, other than crossing scope (it
"sees" more).

Please consider designing your system to consider the constraints of
readonly properties, or design the constraints to fit your system instead.

Marco Pivetta

https://twitter.com/Ocramius

https://ocramius.github.io/

Hello,

If push comes to shove, private properties can be changed with
reflection.

Readonly properties can't.

Please add a readonly toggle to reflection.

Thanks

Karoly Negyesi

1 year ago by Karoly Negyesi — view source

unread

They refuse to compromise even on documentation issues. I am totally
helpless. Not sure what could be done?

Talk to the designers then: bringing your own political issues up to the
programming language/tooling only makes it worse long-term, for everyone 😛

I do not have the luxury of designing my own system. I am forced to use
upstream. I can't help it and given the history of private usage and the
refusal on relaxing them I do not see this improving with the readonly. At
all.

Terrible idea: reflection is mostly introspection tooling, and doesn't
really bend the rules of the type system, other than crossing scope (it
"sees" more).

Please consider designing your system to consider the constraints of
readonly properties, or design the constraints to fit your system instead.

Marco Pivetta

https://twitter.com/Ocramius

https://ocramius.github.io/

Hello,

If push comes to shove, private properties can be changed with
reflection.

Readonly properties can't.

Please add a readonly toggle to reflection.

Thanks

Karoly Negyesi

1 year ago by glash.gnome@gmail.com — view source

unread

Hello,

You can always patch PHP.

In what context do you use reflection ?

It's quite easy to override the behavior of readonly. Do you need
readonly behavior
?

Le sam. 3 déc. 2022 à 23:56, Karoly Negyesi karoly@negyesi.net a écrit :

They refuse to compromise even on documentation issues. I am totally
helpless. Not sure what could be done?

Talk to the designers then: bringing your own political issues up to the
programming language/tooling only makes it worse long-term, for everyone
😛

I do not have the luxury of designing my own system. I am forced to use
upstream. I can't help it and given the history of private usage and the
refusal on relaxing them I do not see this improving with the readonly.
At
all.

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 2:42 PM Marco Pivetta ocramius@gmail.com
wrote:

Terrible idea: reflection is mostly introspection tooling, and doesn't
really bend the rules of the type system, other than crossing scope (it
"sees" more).

Please consider designing your system to consider the constraints of
readonly properties, or design the constraints to fit your system
instead.

Marco Pivetta

https://twitter.com/Ocramius

https://ocramius.github.io/

On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 at 23:39, Karoly Negyesi karoly@negyesi.net
wrote:

Hello,

If push comes to shove, private properties can be changed with
reflection.

Readonly properties can't.

Please add a readonly toggle to reflection.

Thanks

Karoly Negyesi

1 year ago by Andreas Heigl — view source

unread

Hey there

They refuse to compromise even on documentation issues. I am totally
helpless. Not sure what could be done?

When people design their systems and use final, private or readonly,
they have a reason for that. They have a plan on how their library
should be used and also how their library should not be used.That is the
API that is exposed via public methods that is described in the
documentation.

When your code can only make use of a library by tweaking these
constraints, you are using the library in a way that is not intended by
the authors.

There can be two reasons to that: Either you know exactly what you are
doing and you are willing to risk that the way you are using said
library might break with every patch version as the internal workings
might change.

HERE BE DRAGONS: I sometimes actually need to do that (even with a
library I wrote myself) but instead of using reflection I then tend to
use monkey-patching in that case and actually rewrite the code of the
lib on installation. That way the execution is faster as I do not rely
on reflection but can access a public property directly.

Or - and that is most of the time the case - you are using the library
wrong or even using the wrong library.

And as you already contacted the authors and they declined your request
to change their API, the chances are high, that you are using their
Library in an unintended way.

In that case you should reconsider what you are doing. Am I using the
right library? Why could I be using the library wrongly? How can I
change my code to use the provided API of the library?

In the end it always boils down to: Check whether your usecase is what
the library is intended to solve. And if there is no way around
rewriting upstream code: You are on your own! You can not rely upon
anything. Not even language features. You are not using upstream code,
you are abusing it.

My 0.02 €

Cheers

Andreas

Talk to the designers then: bringing your own political issues up to the
programming language/tooling only makes it worse long-term, for everyone 😛

I do not have the luxury of designing my own system. I am forced to use
upstream. I can't help it and given the history of private usage and the
refusal on relaxing them I do not see this improving with the readonly. At
all.

Terrible idea: reflection is mostly introspection tooling, and doesn't
really bend the rules of the type system, other than crossing scope (it
"sees" more).

Please consider designing your system to consider the constraints of
readonly properties, or design the constraints to fit your system instead.

Marco Pivetta

https://twitter.com/Ocramius

https://ocramius.github.io/

Hello,

If push comes to shove, private properties can be changed with
reflection.

Readonly properties can't.

Please add a readonly toggle to reflection.

Thanks

Karoly Negyesi

--
,,,
(o o)
+---------------------------------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo-+
| Andreas Heigl |
| mailto:andreas@heigl.org N 50°22'59.5" E 08°23'58" |
| https://andreas.heigl.org |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| https://hei.gl/appointmentwithandreas |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| GPG-Key: https://hei.gl/keyandreasheiglorg |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+

1 year ago by Hamza Ahmad — view source

unread

Hello,

If we keep the idea of using reflection aside, I still have a reason
to consider readonly flag for private properties. There are two main
uses I consider of readonly properties: prevention of property
modification from the public scope and the securing the property from
losing an important handle. What if the properties are set readonly
with the private scope, so they are secured from getting modified,
even within a class. IF it is a protected and read only property, it
can also be further secured in sub classes.

Internals, I want to appreciate Andreas for choosing a considerate
tone for communicating the opinion that is different from the opinion
shared above. What if we all at least try and adjust the tone like
Andreas has done?

Regards

Hamza

Hey there

They refuse to compromise even on documentation issues. I am totally
helpless. Not sure what could be done?

When people design their systems and use final, private or readonly,
they have a reason for that. They have a plan on how their library
should be used and also how their library should not be used.That is the
API that is exposed via public methods that is described in the
documentation.

When your code can only make use of a library by tweaking these
constraints, you are using the library in a way that is not intended by
the authors.

There can be two reasons to that: Either you know exactly what you are
doing and you are willing to risk that the way you are using said
library might break with every patch version as the internal workings
might change.

HERE BE DRAGONS: I sometimes actually need to do that (even with a
library I wrote myself) but instead of using reflection I then tend to
use monkey-patching in that case and actually rewrite the code of the
lib on installation. That way the execution is faster as I do not rely
on reflection but can access a public property directly.

Or - and that is most of the time the case - you are using the library
wrong or even using the wrong library.

And as you already contacted the authors and they declined your request
to change their API, the chances are high, that you are using their
Library in an unintended way.

In that case you should reconsider what you are doing. Am I using the
right library? Why could I be using the library wrongly? How can I
change my code to use the provided API of the library?

In the end it always boils down to: Check whether your usecase is what
the library is intended to solve. And if there is no way around
rewriting upstream code: You are on your own! You can not rely upon
anything. Not even language features. You are not using upstream code,
you are abusing it.

My 0.02 €

Cheers

Andreas

Talk to the designers then: bringing your own political issues up to the
programming language/tooling only makes it worse long-term, for everyone
😛

I do not have the luxury of designing my own system. I am forced to use
upstream. I can't help it and given the history of private usage and
the
refusal on relaxing them I do not see this improving with the readonly.
At
all.

On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 2:42 PM Marco Pivetta ocramius@gmail.com
wrote:

Terrible idea: reflection is mostly introspection tooling, and doesn't
really bend the rules of the type system, other than crossing scope
(it
"sees" more).

Please consider designing your system to consider the constraints of
readonly properties, or design the constraints to fit your system
instead.

Marco Pivetta

https://twitter.com/Ocramius

https://ocramius.github.io/

On Sat, 3 Dec 2022 at 23:39, Karoly Negyesi karoly@negyesi.net
wrote:

Hello,

If push comes to shove, private properties can be changed with
reflection.

Readonly properties can't.

Please add a readonly toggle to reflection.

Thanks

Karoly Negyesi

--
,,,
(o o)
+---------------------------------------------------------ooO-(_)-Ooo-+
| Andreas Heigl |
| mailto:andreas@heigl.org N 50°22'59.5" E 08°23'58" |
| https://andreas.heigl.org |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| https://hei.gl/appointmentwithandreas |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| GPG-Key: https://hei.gl/keyandreasheiglorg |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+