Hi
On 2026-07-04 04:45, Nick Sdot wrote:
Alright, I earlier wasn't sure if you actually wanted to make the class
readonly. I have a gut feeling that making the class readonly could
backfire. I know you consider `Duration` an VO, but with all the
methods that are likely coming who knows? Making all current properties
readonly results in the same as making the class readonly; maybe it is
worth not making the class itself readonly for the time being?
Given that the class is also `final`, the `readonly` property on the
class can be added and removed without a breaking change [1]. Never say
never, but since Duration is a value-object there also won't be
additional properties in the future, because existing code might not
anticipate them and mishandle Duration objects that make use of the new
properties. That's why it was important to include support for negative
Durations right away.
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
[1] Except that `readonly` also disallows dynamic properties, but those
will be disallowed either way (that's the `strict-properties` in the
stub).
