> Le 29 nov. 2022 à 21:29, Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> a écrit : > > > Thank you everyone for the feedback. Based on this thread, we've made two > changes to the RFC: > > 1. We've moved readonly back to forbidden with a-viz for now. I've added a > section to Future Scope where we really should sort this out in the future, > but we'll do that in the future when we can all focus on the various nuances > of just that piece. > > 2. I rewrote the section on __set to make it clearer. That also included > Ilija and I digging into all the nuances that are already present. The text > may still look a bit complex, but that's because the existing logic is > already complex with readonly. Long story short, the a-viz RFC does not > change anything in the way __set works vis a vis asymmetric visibility; it > just inherits and continues what readonly already started, so it's consistent. > > The PR should be updated in the next week or two with the latest changes. > Baring any major need for change, we expect to call a vote for it shortly > after New Years. > > Thanks all. > > --Larry Garfield >
Hi, In the RFC, section Permitted visibility (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/asymmetric-visibility#permitted_visibility <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/asymmetric-visibility#permitted_visibility>): > The set visibility, if it differs from the main (get) visibility, MUST be > strictly lesser than the main visibility. That is, the set visibility may > only be protected or private. If the main visibility is protected, set > visibility may only be private. Any violation of this rule will result in a > compile time error. > The first sentence does not forbid `public public(set)`, or `protected protected(set)`, etc. (the `set` visibility does not differ from the main visibility), but the rest of the paragraph does not allow it. That should be clarified. (Because forbidding `public public(set)`, etc., makes it slightly more cumbersome to explain the rules, I am slightly in favour not to forbid it.) > There is one exception, that of a private readonly property. That would > technically expand to private private(set) readonly, which is allowed. That sentence should be deleted, as `readonly` is now forbidden. —Claude
