Re: Analysis of property visibility, immutability, and cloning proposals

2020-12-29 15:38 GMT, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>: > On Tue, Dec 29, 2020, at 2:26 AM, Marc wrote: >> >> On 28.12.20 21:23, Larry Garfield wrote: >> > There's been a number of discussions of late around property visibility >> > and how to make objects more immutable. Since it seems to have been >> > well-received in the past, I decided to do a complete analysis and >> > context of the various things that have been floated about recently. >> > >> > The full writeup is here: >> > >> > ›ß¡ÐD,ð'š“ >> > ƒäëhttps://peakd.com/hive-168588/@crell/object-properties-and-immutability >> > >> > I hope it proves stimulating, at least of discussion and not naps. >> > >> >> Thanks for the nice write up Larry! >> >> Is there a reason you didn't mention the proposal for immutable classes? >> (probably because it never went into a final RFC) >> >> https://externals.io/message/94913#94913 >> >> https://externals.io/message/79180#79180 > > Two main reasons: > > 1) It's not been discussed recently (see how old the dates are on those > messages), so I wasn't thinking about it. > > 2) An immutable class would in all practicality be the same as a class where > all the properties are initonly (or writeonce, but that was already > rejected). So any arguments for/against initonly apply in aggregate to an > immutable class. > > --Larry Garfield > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > > Instead of shoe-horning everything into the PHP object system, did anyone consider adding support for records instead, which would always be immutable, and could support the spread operator for cloning-with similar as in JavaScript or OCaml? They could be based on PHP arrays and thus be passed by value. Olle