Somehow HHVM has this working http://3v4l.org/5AFSA
On 20/11/2014 00:44, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
The point of this discussion is that there is an RFC on the table
which can be implemented in such a way that it fixes this behaviour
(by introducing a default parent, or injecting an empty constructor)
or such that it carefully preserves it (by making a special case for
parent::__construct).
I was not planning to do this as part of this RFC. Of course, that
doesn't mean by itself it should not be done, and if it will be done
(after considering all BC consequences, etc.) then the code for this RFC
will need to be changed (while the idea stays). But I do not want to mix
two things - making parent methods always work in places where it makes
sense (ctor, dtor, clone) and refactoring how ctors work to avoid
unpleasant side effect of not evaluating params for missing ctor. These
are two different things, with different consequences, and I don't see
much win in mixing them.
If you are, as you seem to be, defending this as a feature, it
implies we should preserve (and, incidentally, standardise) it. If,
No, not really - I don't propose to standardize it. I do propose to
preserve it, for basic BC reasons, and I do say it was an intended
result, not an accidental omission. Now, this result, of course, can be
what we no longer want, and we can change it - but I don't want to make
it a part of my RFC because I consider it an independent issue worthy of
separate consideration.
This reminds me of the recent discussion over multiple defaults in a
switch. Perhaps as with that we should phrase the question as "is
there any useful purpose to having the language standardised with
this feature, and conversely is there any realistic harm in altering
it?"
You make it sound as if I'm somehow calling for some change in
"standardizing" this feature. On the contrary, I am just preserving the
status quo, it is as "standard" or "non-standard" as it has ever been.
--
Regards,
Bradley.
Direct: 0116 224 7372
Office: 0845 004 0662
Mobile: 07902 672289
E-Mail: b...@legalweb.org.uk
WebSite: legalweb.org.uk
This message is intended only for the use of person(s) ("the Intended
Recipient") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged
and confidential within the meaning of applicable law. Accordingly any dissemination,
distribution, copying or other use of this message or any of its content by any other
person may constitute a breach of civil or criminal law and is strictly prohibited. If
you are not the Intended Recipient please contact the sender as soon as possible. Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not
necessarily reflect the views of Legalwebb UK Ltd or any of its subsidiary businesses.
Legalwebb UK Limited is Registered in Cardiff. Company Number 03874311. Registered for
VAT Number 803886708
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
