Re: [Vote] New in initializers

On 06/07/2021 11:31, Benjamin Eberlei wrote:

This is not 100% correct, you can have an attribte #[Foo(Foo::class)] and then calling ReflectionAttribute::getArguments would also require to resolve the type Foo. So this is not different than what could happen right now already.

Despite its name, "::class" doesn't care about class definitions, it just performs a string substitution based on the "namespace" and "use" statements in the current file. In most cases, that happens entirely at compile time, so the following two source files compile identically: Short form: namespace Somebody\Something; #[ Foo( Foo::class ) ] class Whatever {} Expanded form: namespace Somebody\Something; #[ \Somebody\Something\Foo( '\Somebody\Something\Foo' ) ] class Whatever {} There is no need for the class \Somebody\Something\Foo to actually exist in either case, the argument is just a string: https://3v4l.org/bgNa2#v8.0.8 Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]