On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 at 21:55, Robin Chalas wrote:
> FY I started working on the implementation., hopefully it will bring more
> arguments in favor of that RFC which I’m willing to submit asap as well.
>
For future reference, please just open a PR with the implementation before
writing an RFC fo
On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 at 21:24, David Gebler wrote:
> What's the difference between this and what was proposed in
> https://externals.io/message/120799 ? I don't get why this wouldn't
> require
> an RFC.
>
Because it frankly doesn't require an RFC.
I think people are getting confused as to when on
> I'm not opposed to these, but would this be a good time to also add an
> interface for attributable reflection objects, so that we can type against
> that? These methods would all then go on that interface.
I was going for a tiered approach. Once these methods were in, I would propose
adding
> What's the difference between this and what was proposed in
https://externals.io/message/120799 ? I don't get why this wouldn't require
an RFC.
FY I started working on the implementation., hopefully it will bring more
arguments in favor of that RFC which I’m willing to submit asap as well.
—
What's the difference between this and what was proposed in
https://externals.io/message/120799 ? I don't get why this wouldn't require
an RFC.
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023, at 6:09 PM, Ollie Read wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> A while back, I wrote a lengthy post about suggested improvements for
> reflection, but I would like to come back to address additional methods
> for dealing with attributes. (I have an open git issue here:
> https://github.com
Hello all,
A while back, I wrote a lengthy post about suggested improvements for
reflection, but I would like to come back to address additional methods for
dealing with attributes. (I have an open git issue here:
https://github.com/php/php-src/issues/8489)
I'd like to introduce the following
