On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 10:08 PM Rowan Collins
wrote:
> On 23/09/2018 19:41, Claude Pache wrote:
> >> 3) Object properties may be type hinted and the class author has until
> the end
> >> of the constructor to make sure they're fulfilled, otherwise TypeError
> on the
> >> spot (what I'm proposing
On 23/09/2018 21:50, Christoph M. Becker wrote:
In my opinion, explicitly *declared* properties should not be
unsettable. We don't allow to undefine constants, functions, classes
etc. either. Adding and removing other properties could still be allowed.
While I agree, I think that's a somewha
On 23/09/2018 19:31, David Rodrigues wrote:
Em dom, 23 de set de 2018 às 13:09, Larry Garfield
escreveu:
3) Object properties may be type hinted and the class author has until the
end
of the constructor to make sure they're fulfilled, otherwise TypeError on
the
spot (what I'm proposing).
Ite
On 23.09.2018 at 22:07, Rowan Collins wrote:
> On 23/09/2018 19:41, Claude Pache wrote:
>>
>>> 3) Object properties may be type hinted and the class author has
>>> until the end
>>> of the constructor to make sure they're fulfilled, otherwise
>>> TypeError on the
>>> spot (what I'm proposing).
>>
> Just to be sure you don’t miss the herd that this elephant is concealing:
>
> In addition, you *must* forbid unset() on those properties...
Shouldn't we delegate the whole problem to object type resolving and make it
more strict? Right now properties are not guaranteed at all - you can
have `
On 23/09/2018 19:41, Claude Pache wrote:
3) Object properties may be type hinted and the class author has until the end
of the constructor to make sure they're fulfilled, otherwise TypeError on the
spot (what I'm proposing).
Just to be sure you don’t miss the herd that this elephant is concealin
Wrong reply button :(
On 23/09/2018 07:18, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
That is the entire point of the elephant analogy: that knowing what can
get in doesn't necessarily mean knowing what is already inside - BUT,
knowing what can get in may still useful in itself.
I understood that, and I disagree -
>
> 3) Object properties may be type hinted and the class author has until the
> end
> of the constructor to make sure they're fulfilled, otherwise TypeError on the
> spot (what I'm proposing).
Just to be sure you don’t miss the herd that this elephant is concealing:
In addition, you *must* f
Em dom, 23 de set de 2018 às 13:09, Larry Garfield
escreveu:
> 3) Object properties may be type hinted and the class author has until the
> end
> of the constructor to make sure they're fulfilled, otherwise TypeError on
> the
> spot (what I'm proposing).
>
Item 3 could not be enough, for instanc
On Sunday, September 23, 2018 1:18:02 AM CDT Rasmus Schultz wrote:
> > That is the entire point of the elephant analogy: that knowing what can
>
> get in doesn't necessarily mean knowing what is already inside - BUT,
> knowing what can get in may still useful in itself.
>
> I understood that, and
On 17.09.2018 at 15:16, Christoph M. Becker wrote:
> We bundle an unmodified libsqlite3 for at least two years. Since then
> all updates go into any dev, alpha and beta releases, while security
> patches (usually backports from libsqlite3) go into stable branches.
>
> ext/sqlite3 requires libsql
11 matches
Mail list logo
