On 07/08/2022 11:54, Lynn wrote:
Reading "public private", "public protected", or "protected private"
reads really weird `public private(set) static self $property`.
Interesting, it seems that you've unconsciously broken it up as "public
private" followed by "(set)", rather than "public" followed by
"private(set)". Perhaps it's because of the position of the parentheses,
which do feel awkward to me at first glance. Would it read more
naturally to you with different punctuation?
public (private set) static self $property;
Or:
(public; private set) static self $property;
Or:
public private-set static self $property;
On 05/08/2022 19:08, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
I'm wondering if this sort of behavior could be indicated via attributes
instead? Something like `#[PropertySetBehavior(PROPERTY_SET_PRIVATE)]`.
Attributes have the benefit of being separate from the property
declaration, arguably more readable (one per line), and composable.
Attributes are no more intrinsically "separate" or "one per line" than
keywords; the following would be perfectly valid with the RFC's proposed
syntax:
class Foo {
public private(set)
static int|string $id;
}
And the following would be valid with an attribute like you suggest:
class Foo {
#[PropertySetBehavior(PROPERTY_SET_PRIVATE)] public static
int|string $id;
}
Even a shorter attribute name would have the extra punctuation, and the
restriction that it comes before the normal visibility keyword:
class Foo {
#[PrivateSet] public static int|string $id;
}
Regards,
--
Rowan Tommins
[IMSoP]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
