We discussed this whole thing in different channels and together refined
the original idea as well as what the actual problem and a solution
would be.
The actual problem are multiple calls to the constructor because they
break the encapsulation. We know that there are many ways to do so but
this i
On 14/01/2017 14:58, Giovanni Giacobbi wrote:
If you go for blocking explicit calls to __construct() (i'm personally in
favour of it), i hope you would change the syntax for its only legitimate
use which is calling the parent's constructor within a constructor, so how
about something like parent(
2017-01-15 12:41 GMT+01:00 Giovanni Giacobbi :
> You are right, I feel responsible for it (but proudly), as an excuse please
> consider that the three topics covered have a certain dependancy:
>
> Forbid __construct calls -> Forbid in constructor as well for coherency ->
> need a new way to call p
You are right, I feel responsible for it (but proudly), as an excuse please
consider that the three topics covered have a certain dependancy:
Forbid __construct calls -> Forbid in constructor as well for coherency ->
need a new way to call parent's constructor
(bonus topic: implicit constructors)
you guys went slightly off topic :P
2017-01-14 19:24 GMT+01:00 Fleshgrinder :
> On 1/14/2017 7:10 PM, Michał Brzuchalski wrote:
> > AFAIK parent is a speciual scope which help refers to variables and
> > functions in base classe
> > http://php.net/manual/kr/keyword.parent.php
> > So it looks like proposing your syntax could lead to
On 1/14/2017 7:10 PM, Michał Brzuchalski wrote:
> AFAIK parent is a speciual scope which help refers to variables and
> functions in base classe
> http://php.net/manual/kr/keyword.parent.php
> So it looks like proposing your syntax could lead to huge BC break.
> In other languages (eg. Java) there
2017-01-14 15:58 GMT+01:00 Giovanni Giacobbi :
> I'm surprised no one is raising a strong argument about the
> "parent::__construct()" call, so I'll do it.
>
> I never liked typing "parent::__construct()" to call parent's class
> constructor, but now that this proposal is being discussed (and migh
I'm surprised no one is raising a strong argument about the
"parent::__construct()" call, so I'll do it.
I never liked typing "parent::__construct()" to call parent's class
constructor, but now that this proposal is being discussed (and might even
be accepted) I would like to throw some more meat
> Am 14.01.2017 um 11:26 schrieb Fleshgrinder :
>
>> On 1/14/2017 11:20 AM, Andreas Heigl wrote:
>> Do we as "makers of PHP" want to dictate the user what the "intended"
>> behaviour of PHP is? Or are we treating the user as a responsible person
>> that knows what to do and also not to do?
>>
>
On 1/14/2017 11:20 AM, Andreas Heigl wrote:
> Do we as "makers of PHP" want to dictate the user what the "intended"
> behaviour of PHP is? Or are we treating the user as a responsible person
> that knows what to do and also not to do?
>
> Personally I'm in favour of the later. Let the user be able
Hi All.
Am 14.01.17 um 11:03 schrieb Fleshgrinder:
> On 1/13/2017 8:24 AM, Wes wrote:
[…]
> On 1/13/2017 8:24 AM, Wes wrote:
>>> the only reason for prohibiting explicit __construct calls is that it makes
>>> PHP objects mutable
>>
>>
>> then don't call it explicitly, exactly like you wouldn't use
On 1/13/2017 8:24 AM, Wes wrote:
>>
>> I am baffled that this (still) works:
>>
>
> __clone was special cased in 5.x, but special case was removed in 7.0
> means that previously you couldn't do publicly $obj->__clone(); now you can
> and, yes, it's as dangerous as it looks
> however, the special c
>
> I am baffled that this (still) works:
>
__clone was special cased in 5.x, but special case was removed in 7.0
means that previously you couldn't do publicly $obj->__clone(); now you can
and, yes, it's as dangerous as it looks
however, the special case was removed for a reason that i'm sure is
Hey Tim,
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:51 PM, Tim Bezhashvyly wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> thank you for support with __construct. I absolutely agree that it breaks
> BC and fine to propose it just for PHP 8.
>
> By polymorphic dispatch I mean a possibility to have the same method
> (including construc
Hi Richard,
thank you for support with __construct. I absolutely agree that it breaks BC
and fine to propose it just for PHP 8.
By polymorphic dispatch I mean a possibility to have the same method (including
constructor) in multiple variations. E.g.:
class Price
{
public function __constru
On 1/12/2017 10:13 PM, Marco Pivetta wrote:
> Hey Richard,
>
> I made an example where everything was in a single class, but most
> scenarios involve a lazy-loading wrapper that has no knowledge of the
> original class besides its constructor.
>
> I use this approach to generate proxy classes tha
Hi Marco,
the only reason for prohibiting explicit __construct calls is that it makes PHP
objects mutable and it's state unpredictable. Still would like to give this RFC
a try.
And what about polymorphic dispatch?
Regards,
Tim
> On 12 Jan 2017, at 21:35, Marco Pivetta wrote:
>
> Heya,
>
>
Hey Richard,
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:58 PM, Fleshgrinder wrote:
> On 1/12/2017 9:35 PM, Marco Pivetta wrote:
> > Heya,
> >
> > While I agree that it is weird to be able to call constructors more than
> > once, this is generally used for:
> >
> > * lazy loading
> > * resource reset
> >
> > Sp
On 1/12/2017 9:35 PM, Marco Pivetta wrote:
> Heya,
>
> While I agree that it is weird to be able to call constructors more than
> once, this is generally used for:
>
> * lazy loading
> * resource reset
>
> Specifically, what is going on is something like following:
> final class DbConnection
Heya,
While I agree that it is weird to be able to call constructors more than
once, this is generally used for:
* lazy loading
* resource reset
Specifically, what is going on is something like following:dsn = $dsn;
// socket stuff happens here, much like with PDO
}
public fun
On 1/12/2017 8:19 AM, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Am 12.01.2017 um 08:11 schrieb Tim Bezhashvyly:
>> Disallow explicit call of __construct method
>
> I am baffled that this (still) works:
>
> $ cat /tmp/t.php
> class C
> {
> public function __construct()
> {
> print __METHOD__ .
Am 12.01.2017 um 08:11 schrieb Tim Bezhashvyly:
> Disallow explicit call of __construct method
I am baffled that this (still) works:
$ cat /tmp/t.php
__construct();
$ php /tmp/t.php
C::__construct
C::__construct
$ php --version
PHP 7.1.0 (cli) (built: Dec 1 2016 07:39:00) ( NTS )
Copyright (
23 matches
Mail list logo
