Hi On 6/19/24 16:03, Erick de Azevedo Lima wrote:
I have considered some names, actually. I just chose this one for the implementation because I tried to design it to be as close as possible to the C# implementation and they call it "static constructor". But the name can be changed to another one without any problem at all.
I would suggest `__constructStatic()`. This matches the existing naming pattern of `__callStatic()` being the companion to `__call()`.
Best regards Tim Düsterhus
