On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 1:43 PM John Coggeshall wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> I poked around a bit in the Enum RFCs and I could find (maybe I missed)
> what's up with this:
>
> enum Foo:string implements \Stringable
> {
> case FOO = 'bar';
>
> public function __toString() {
> return $th
On 17/08/2024 21:27, John Coggeshall wrote:
would anyone have a strong objection to getting an RFC going to get
this voted on?
I don't think this is the right question to ask. Just write the RFC if
you want to. If anyone objects, they will do so on the ML and at vote
time, but it would be wro
On Saturday, 17 August 2024 at 22:27, John Coggeshall
wrote:
> As it seems to me there isn't a particularly strong argument for why we don't
> allow __toString() , would anyone have a strong objection to getting an RFC
> going to get this voted on? I didn't look closely at the original PR from
On 17 August 2024 21:27:59 BST, John Coggeshall wrote:
>
>I don't think it's without purpose... what it should be for is to allow
>developers to make flexible APIs where they can type-hint string|Stringable
>and the user of the API doesn't have to worry about it.
My view is that the user *sh
> Just to show the range of viewpoints on this, I'd like to mention my opinion
> that Stringable is a horrible feature, with an implementation that's
> completely inconsistent with the rest of the language, and no clear semantic
> purpose. If your contract is "the input must be usable as a stri
On 17 August 2024 01:47:20 BST, John Coggeshall wrote:
> What's the point of a Stringable interface if we can't actually implement
> __toString() for it?
Just to show the range of viewpoints on this, I'd like to mention my opinion
that Stringable is a horrible feature, with an implementatio
On Aug 16 2024, at 6:49 pm, Rob Landers wrote:
>
> That being said, I would like to be able to use | and & on integer enums more
> than I would strings as stringables. Something like “flags” mode in C#. Maybe
> even make “flag” a backing type of enums. It would make a ton of json flags
> much
> To the original question, there's two reasons that __toString() was
> deliberately omitted from enums:
>
> 1. To discourage their use as "fancy strings". Enums are their own type,
> independent of any other. Making them usable as 95% strings partially defeats
> their purpose.
I disagree with
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024, at 21:57, John Coggeshall wrote:
>> Didja really?
>>
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/auto-implement_stringable_for_string_backed_enums
> I swear I did.
>
> That said, looking at that RFC it's a slightly different take than what I am
> suggesting. This RFC suggests that `stri
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024, at 5:01 PM, Bilge wrote:
> On 16/08/2024 22:51, Gina P. Banyard wrote:
>> On Friday, 16 August 2024 at 22:01, Bilge wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, 20:57 John Coggeshall, wrote:
I'm not seeing an obvious upside to forbidding straight out `__toString()`
On 16/08/2024 22:51, Gina P. Banyard wrote:
On Friday, 16 August 2024 at 22:01, Bilge wrote:
On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, 20:57 John Coggeshall, wrote:
I'm not seeing an obvious upside to forbidding straight out
|__toString()|
I tend to agree, but Crell will drive by in a minute to drop
On Friday, 16 August 2024 at 22:01, Bilge wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, 20:57 John Coggeshall, wrote:
>
>> I'm not seeing an obvious upside to forbidding straight out __toString()
>
> I tend to agree, but Crell will drive by in a minute to drop some
> philosophical nonsense about why we're all
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024, 11:22 PM Bilge wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, 20:57 John Coggeshall, wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm not seeing an obvious upside to forbidding straight out __toString()
>>
>
> I tend to agree, but Crell will drive by in a minute to drop some
> philosophical nonsense about why we're
On Fri, 16 Aug 2024, 20:57 John Coggeshall, wrote:
>
> I'm not seeing an obvious upside to forbidding straight out __toString()
>
I tend to agree, but Crell will drive by in a minute to drop some
philosophical nonsense about why we're all wrong :^)
Cheers,
Bilge
> Didja really?
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/auto-implement_stringable_for_string_backed_enums
I swear I did.
That said, looking at that RFC it's a slightly different take than what I am
suggesting. This RFC suggests that string enums automatically implement
Stringable . I am pointing out that i
>
> Didja really?
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/auto-implement_stringable_for_string_backed_enums
Why has it been withdrawn?
On 16/08/2024 20:39, John Coggeshall wrote:
Hey all,
I poked around a bit in the Enum RFCs and I could find (maybe I
missed) what's up with this:
Didja really?
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/auto-implement_stringable_for_string_backed_enums
17 matches
Mail list logo
