On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Clint Priest <cpri...@zerocue.com> wrote:
> So the above would actually introduce an get/set accessor rather than a
> property, correct?
Preferably it would a faster C based implementation for the check, but
in principle it could also use accessors to achieve the goal.
> If we were to abandon the long form ( set(DateTime
> $date) { ... } ) and go back to the original syntax, then the only way to
> "type hint" would be with no custom accessor logic, which I don't think
> makes sense.
Why? My point was that you could use that syntax with accessors too,
just like you can in C#:
public DateTime $date {
get { ... }
set { ... }
}
I don't know whether this is better or worse though. I like it because
it would be consistent between typehinted properties without accessors
and typehinted properties with accessors. But I can see how people
don't like the magic $value variable.
> I can agree though that the even further abbreviated syntax -> get/set
> accessor would be nice, however many have already pointed out that these
> "equivalents" reduce clarity, especially for the less "up to speed" of the
> developers. If they were to encounter that, they may have to really do some
> digging to realize that it’s a "super auto implemented" accessor.
They don't really need to know that they are auto implemented
accessors (where would it make a difference?) Maybe they won't even be
accessors. It's just an implementation detail. From looking at it,
it's just a property with a type, just like you know it from C++, C#,
Java or whatever.
Nikita
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
