Clint,
How about
final public $Hours {}
That would allow for the read only and limit the inheritance.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 11, 2011, at 11:02 PM, Clint M Priest <cpri...@zerocue.com> wrote:
> https://bugs.php.net/patch-display.php?bug=49526&patch=v2.2&revision=1323662103
>
> This one addresses the read-only, write-only aspects. Though they are not
> quite what the RFC specifies...
>
> class TimePeriod {
> public $Hours {
> get { return 5; }
> }
> }
>
> $o = new TimePeriod();
> $o->Hours = 4;
>
> Results in:
> Fatal error: Cannot set read-only property TimePeriod::$Hours, no setter
> defined. in %s on line %d
>
> Likewise in the other direction for write-only properties.
>
> The difficulty is that one could extend TimePeriod and define a setter. This
> is what the RFC talks about when using a readonly keyword. There presently
> isn't a readonly keyword defined, nor a writeonly.
>
> Should we create a readonly/writeonly keyword, or would something along these
> lines be better/more flexible?
>
> class TimePeriod {
> public $Hours {
> get { return 5; }
> private final set { }
> }
> }
>
> Creating (forcing the author to create) a private final setter which would
> not allow a set to occur and could not be over-ridden?
>
> I've also added two tests for the read-only and write-only, as it exists in
> the above patch.
>
> Pierre, with the new/updated RFC, should I gut the sections that I decided
> against (such as the several alternate syntaxes) or leave them in?
>
> -Clint
>
>
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
