> I *think* we are on the same page here, though I'm not sure what 'user' is > referring to (user of interface "implementer") or (user of class B). In any > case, I don't believe that your class B would be allowed at present, but if > it is, then it should not be allowed because defining a property to satisfy > the requirements of an accessor is not right.
According to whom? In my opinion, not allowing a property to satisfy the requirement of an accessor is wrong. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
