What about PDO's fetch-mode PDO::FETCH_CLASS? Apparently, it first fills in properties and then calls the constructor. Seems unlikely that the new behavior for uninitialized properties will cause a problem here, but sometimes weird things happen. And this is another thing to check. I also fully support Johannes Schlüter with the reference thing. Binding by reference to a query, passing by reference to any sort of function might happen here and there, and the developer will have to find workarounds in a place which otherwise would be straighforward.
Having said that, I +1 the idea of typed properties (well, my internals karma does not give much weight to this anyway ;-) ). On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 9:11 AM Benjamin Eberlei <kont...@beberlei.de> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Phil Sturgeon <pjsturg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I have completed the draft for an RFC, to add Typed Properties. The > > patch has been written by the one and only Joe Watkins. > > > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/typed-properties > > > > I would really appreciate constructive feedback on this RFC, with a > > few areas especially: > > > > 1. How scared are we that integers can be expanded to floats on runtime? > > > > 2. This whole temporary nullability situation, where unset properties > > will error on attempted usage if not set. Should they instead error > > after the constructor has been called if they are still not holding a > > value? > > > > 3. Weak vs Strict. Right now this is entirely strict, with no > > declare() to change mode. Reasons for this vary, from various sources, > > but include "Not sure how to implement it" and "Well people should not > > be using properties as part of their public API". > > > > Help on 3 would be appreciated. > > > > Also let's please avoid "PHP IS TURNING INTO JAVA" and the other > > rather common rhetoric. Strict Type Hinting might have been seen as a > > battleground for fans of strict and fans of weak to fight through a > > keyboard, but this RFC will not be the repeat. > > > > We'll have a nice, orderly, constructive conversation about this RFC, > > and improve the patch as you all provide feedback. > > > > Let me know what you think folks! > > > > Thanks for the RFC. I love it. > > Some points: > > 1. You should really try not to open any can of worms with regard to other > already defined parts of the language: > > - Assume type juggling is a given, use that exact same rules > - Assume strict/weak is a given, don't try to change this. > - Document how public int $var; works with regard to default type, > explicitly define it outside the scope of nullable types and delegate > decision forward to a potential RFC in that area. > > Regarding your bullets then: > > 1. This point is outside the scope of this RFC, it might be relevant when > we discuss changing type juggling to be more consistent. > 2. This is propably the critical point of this RFC, I think given how > public function foo(int $i) forces type juggling, typed properties should > force juggling to. This must be after the constructor, because public > stdClass $foo; would otherwise never work. > 3. Weak vs strict: Outside of this RFC, assume that it is strict when > declared, otherwise weak for consistency with the status quo. > > > > > > -- > > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > -- Best regards, Victor Bolshov
