On 19 July 2018 at 15:20, Christoph M. Becker <cmbecke...@gmx.de> wrote:
> It seems to me that either of these proposals would render the lazy > initialization pattern outlined in the “Overloaded Properties” > section[1] invalid. > > [1] <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/typed_properties_v2#overloaded_properties> > Hm, I guess I didn't read that section carefully enough. It strikes me that that entire code pattern is a hack due to lack of property accessors, and it seems a shame to reduce the usefulness of the language's type system just to support it. >From the responses on this thread, I get the feeling I'm in the minority, but it still feels utterly wrong to me that a property marked as non-nullable offers no guarantee at all that it will actually hold a valid value. Regards, -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]
