On Sat, May 9, 2026, at 9:09 AM, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP] wrote:
> On 08/05/2026 09:44, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> following Rowan’s request from the earlier “let the "new" operator 
>> fail when the __construct( ) function returns a value” discussion [1], 
>> I have now created a dedicated RFC to deprecate returning values from 
>> __construct() and __destruct().
>>
>> Please find the RFC text at: 
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecate-return-value-from-construct
>
>
> Hi Tim,
>
> Thanks for writing this up.
>
> In terms of the proposal, I am thoroughly in favour. Deliberate use of a 
> return value here is rare, and refactoring to use a non-magic helper 
> method should generally be fairly easy.
> It's also in line with restrictions added to other magic methods - e.g. 
> calling __toString() directly could return any value until 8.0, but it 
> now acts as though declared with a return type of "string".
>
> In terms of the RFC text, though, I think there should be more than a 
> "see also" link to the previous RFC at 
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/make_ctor_ret_void This went to a vote and was 
> declined (with a majority in favour, but not the required 
> super-majority), so I think the new RFC should explain how either a) the 
> new proposal is different from the old one; or b) the circumstances are 
> different from when they were last voted.
>
> (I think our policy wording on this [1] probably needs to be tightened 
> up slightly; as written, it implies that a failed proposal could be 
> brought to vote unchanged every 6 months, until the author got the 
> result they wanted.)
>
> [1] 
> https://github.com/php/policies/blob/main/feature-proposals.rst#resurrecting-rejected-proposals
>
> Regards,
>
> -- 
> Rowan Tommins
> [IMSoP]

I agree with Rowan on both fronts.  +1 on the feature, but also +1 on better 
explanation of why this attempt is better/different/more worthy of support than 
previous attempts.

--Larry Garfield

Reply via email to