Re: [RFC] Allow ::class on objects

Hey Marco, > On Jan 9, 2020, at 5:04 PM, Marcio Almada <marcio.web2@gmail.com> wrote: > > Regarding the inclusion of new keywords with similar behavior of > :class: > > Would Interfaces\FooInterface::trait or > Traits\FooTrait::interface > cause a run time error? If I'm not mistaken ::class > can't trigger > error because it can't trigger autoload like > class_exists() calls > does. > > Currently ::class can be used to resolve any name like > trim::class. IMMO it would be weird to have > ::class with the > current no autoload / error free behavior and then ::trait, > ::function and ::interface > triggering autoload and emitting some > error level. You are absolutely correct. I am so used to PhpStorm highlighting issues that I sometimes assume that PHP will throw an error/warning for the same. So if ::interface and ::trait were added, then (tools like) PhpStorm could have enough information to flag them if developers misspell them or they are otherwise unknown. > And also it would be weird to have ::trait, > ::function and > ::interface with the same loose behavior as > ::class Why weird? I can only assume Foo::trait vs. Bar::interface vs. Baz::class would not be hard to grok, and that it would would provide more valuable information to a reader than Foo::class vs. Bar:: class vs. Baz::class. > in that case, it seems less surprising to have just ::class > everywhere instead. How so? I was very surprised when I first realized that I could do MyInterface::class, but I would not have been surprised by MyInterface::interface. > ::function That said you bring up one I did not but would also like ::function as well as ::method and even ::var or ::variable and ::const or ::constant. -Mike