On Wed, Aug 10, 2022, 11:30 PM Rowan Tommins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > To be honest, I put them in that order more for "purity" reasons: if they > come before __call, they can change the existing behaviour of the class, by > defining an extension method with the same name as a "virtual" method > implemented with __call. That then becomes a very different feature. > I would argue in favor of extension having precedence over __call because 1) classes with __call wouldn't be able to be `extended` and 2) extensions could actually "fix" the ~ab~use of some use of __call. I suppose this would allow me to write an Extension that mimics the exact behavior of __call and actually avoid __call from being hit while still keeping the same behavior of the class.
