Hi!
> In summary: should abstract protected constructors be inaccessible by
> siblings, as is true of __clone and __destruct? Should __construct, __clone
> and __destruct always be accessible in relatives, as is true of other
> methods? Depending on the answers, there could be a documentation issu
Hi!
> In summary: should abstract protected constructors be inaccessible by
> siblings, as is true of __clone and __destruct? Should __construct, __clone
> and __destruct always be accessible in relatives, as is true of other
> methods? Depending on the answers, there could be a documentation issu
Hi!
> handler, which is why it behaves differently from normal methods. In the
> time that I looked, I couldn't find where the access behavior for
> __construct and __destruct was controlled in the source code.
Access for functions is defined by zend_check_protected() and in
zend_std_get_method()
