Hello internals,

As far as I can tell from previous conversations and PRs; static properties 
aren’t supported in readonly classes for technical reasons and because nobody 
was sure what to do with them ... 

... but that seems weird because you can also do something like this: 
https://3v4l.org/uYNQD to hack your way around it if you want a mutable static 
state encapsulated in the class.

So, I would like to propose a question: should readonly classes be allowed to 
have static properties? And if so, should they be allowed to be mutable? Or 
rather, should the static keyword also be prevented from being used in readonly 
class methods?

It just feels weird to say that "static properties aren’t allowed, but you can 
create static properties by embedding them in a method!" In other words, it 
feels inconsistent.

— Rob

Reply via email to