On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 13:04, Thomas Gutbier <thomas.gutb...@anthrotec.de>
wrote:
> Am 08.05.2020 um 12:37 schrieb G. P. B.:
> > I think everyone can agree this is useful. But the issue here is the
> > implementation. Because from what I know PHP's references are aspecial
> > kind of pain in the engine.
> >
> > That's why the common wisdom is to use references in PHP as least as
> possible.
> > And IIRC what you are trying to achieve would need a major overhaul of
> how
> > references work and someone who wanted to tackle this would have done it
> on
> > their own and propose an RFC at the same time.
> >
> > So sadly unless something semi-concrete shows up, I'm considering this a
> > pipe dream.
> > But I'd gladly be shown otherwise.
>
> Isn't that already solved for typed properties?
>
> Consider this:
>
> class A { public static int $number = 5; }
> $num = &A::$number;
> $num = "String";
>
> This will result in an uncaught TypeError,
> see https://3v4l.org/XC6hk
>
> I would think, it would be consistent if referenced parameters
> behaved in exactly the same way.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>
Indeed, I forgot that typed references properties for classes were a thing
now.
It does make this way less of a pipe dream and something achievable, but I
would imagine this not to be trivially implemented/extended to accommodate
this.
Moreover, although this is bad design IMHO, but some people may rely on this
weird feature, which brings back the whole how to handle BC question.
I for one, would be in favour of burning this into the ground but I don't
know how
others feel.
Best regards
George P. Banyard
>
