> On 6 Aug 2022, at 00:08, Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
>
> Ilija Tovilo and I are happy to present the first new RFC for PHP 8.3:
> Asymmetric Visibility.
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/asymmetric-visibility
>
> Details are in the RFC, but it's largely a copy of Swift's support for the
> same.
>
> --
> Larry Garfield
> la...@garfieldtech.com
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
Hi Larry,
I like most of this, but I have one disagreement.
Can you expand a bit more on the reasoning for restricting the ability to
combine __set() here?
The RFC states that it’s to keep consistency with `readonly`, because __set on
a readonly property that’s initialised throws an error - but isn’t that because
of the nature of it being readonly, rather than because of the visibility
rules? The error given is "Cannot modify readonly property” thrown from within
the __set() method, not "Cannot access protected property” thrown from the
outside calling context, when the __set() method is not implemented.
If I set a property to readonly I would expect it to not be settable after
initialisation, regardless of visibility, whether it’s via direct access or via
__set, etc. (i.e. what readonly does now)
But if I set a property to `public private(set)` for example, I would
**expect** that the __set method on that class (or in the hierarchy if using
protected(set)) would be called when setting it from an inaccessible context,
just as it would be called when setting a regular protected property.
It seems very unintuitive to me, that the first example here would work, but
that the second would not work:
class Foo {
protected readonly int $bar;
public function __set(string $name, mixed $value): void {
$this->{$name} = $value;
}
}
$a = new Foo;
$a->bar = 1;
class Bar {
public protected(set) int $baz;
public function __set(string $name, mixed $value): void {
$this->{$name} = $value;
}
}
$b = new Bar;
$b->baz = 1;
Cheers
Stephen
