Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Clone with

> On 9 Jun 2023, at 20:55, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2023, at 5:34 AM, Stephen Reay wrote: > >> If the property hooks RFC had already passed a vote, I’d suggest that >> some expansion of hooks could provide a cleaner solution here, but it >> hasn’t yet (and I understand it’s not desirable to tie the fate of one >> RFC to another so heavily) so here we are. > > You're suggesting some kind of clone hook on properties? > That would be interesting, but definitely out of scope for both RFCs at the moment. :-) > > --Larry Garfield > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php > Hi Larry, Yes - in the same way that get/set hooks on properties allow much better alternatives to __get/__set magic methods, a clone hook could provide a better alternative when cloning (I could see two or three variations of how it might work that seem intuitive for various “clone” and “clone with” cases). Agreed, I wasn’t suggesting that it should be attempted as part of this - I was more referencing that there are other “ugly” magic methods that are planned/expected to be dramatically improved by a property hook alternative, and thus IMO “this makes the clone magic method a bit fugly” is of much less concern long term, compared to “this does stuff the user can’t control and is non-obvious, but we have to maintain this behaviour ‘forever’ because to change it would be a BC break" Cheers Stephen