Why perpetuate the problem though? I'd tend to think 3 would be the best solution.
-----Original Message----- From: Johannes Schlüter [mailto:johan...@schlueters.de] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 6:52 PM To: Clint M Priest Cc: Pierre Joye; internals@lists.php.net Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Accessors v2 Patch On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 01:01 +0000, Clint M Priest wrote: > To be complete I should probably add something to the reflection system as > well. At present the getters/setters would show up as functions. > > What would be preferable? > 1) Show up as regular functions and let users fend for themselves? > 2) Hide from getMethods() and: > 2.1) Provide getAccessors() - Probably returning a new > ReflectionPropertyAccessor class? > 2.2) Provide getGetters(), getSetters() > 3) Modify ReflectionProperty to include hasGetter() and hasSetter() > > Comments? Reflection in PHP typically is leaking the implementation details typically quite a lot instead of abstracting things away (interfaces and Traits are ReflectionClass instances etc.) I didn't look at the implementation but if these accessors are implemented as methods (especially if it can be called just like one) I would go for approach 1) and probably mark with a flag. For everything else we'd probably have to clean-u reflection to leak less details to make sense. johannes > -----Original Message----- > From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre....@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2011 6:47 PM > To: Clint M Priest > Cc: internals@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Accessors v2 Patch > > oh right, I missed them. Yes, so it is covered as well :) > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Clint M Priest <cpri...@zerocue.com> wrote: > > There are already two tests against private read and private write, should > > I add two for protected as well? > > Cheers, > -- > Pierre > > @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org > -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
