On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Patrick Schaaf <p...@bof.de> wrote:
> I thought I'd made a proposal that would solve that problem, but maybe it
> was
> overlooked, or more likely too ugly to be recognized as such.
>
> Requires a single new feature / syntax, that at least I find missing right
> now:
>
> class ... {
> no methodname();
> // or
> no $property;
> }
>
> removing the specified thing from the class, with the possibility to then
> redefine it. Silently ignore this when the thing doesn't exist.
>
Removing methods from an extending class is an LSP violation. It shouldn't
be done and I don't know any languages with an object orientation system
similar to PHP that allow this.
I think that this "no" tagging approach wouldn't really solve anything,
just patch it up in some rather ugly way.
Nikita
