Re: [RFC Discussion] Typed Properties

From: Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2016 10:48:52 +0000
Subject: Re: [RFC Discussion] Typed Properties
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message
On 3/19/2016 11:38 AM, Björn Larsson wrote:
> Den 2016-03-18 kl. 21:12, skrev Fleshgrinder:
>> No worries you are not, not at all. I just wanted to thwart you and
>> others in directly assigning ...
>>
>>      final class A {
>>          int $x;
>>      }
>>
>> ... to be *public* and obstruct the opportunity of assigning it a
>> meaningful new functionality.
>>
> Well, but if one should assign int $x without visibility keyword a
> meaning, shouldn't it be the same as for function y() {} without
> keyword, i.e. public?
> 
> Of course one can change both, but that sounds like a 8.0 topic.
> 
> Regards //Björn
> 
> 

It is a sad state the implicit public properties use *var* and implicit
public methods nothing, this makes the introduction of new visibility
modifiers terribly complicated. You are completely right, they should be
the same and *var* should be banned. It is consistent and that is very
important. I cannot and do not want to argue against this. Yet at the
same time the lack of access (and additional visibility) modifiers is
what I am missing the most. Seems as if this has to wait for 8.0 (or
9.0, depending on the resistance). :(

-- 
Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger



Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] OpenPGP digital signature signature.asc

Thread (117 messages)

« previous php.internals (#91769) next »