Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Deprecate functions with overloaded signatures

Hi Derick, In any case, I don't mind this — I'm actually going to suggest to change > the constructor to: > > public function __construct(DateTimeInterface $start, DateInterval > $interval, DateTimeInterface|int $end, int $options = 0) {} > > And then *only* add: > > public static function createFromISO8601String(string $specification, int > $options = 0): static {} > > This solves the original problem of not being able to define the > signatures in stubs, and also extracts the most problematic of methods > into a factory method where it should always have belonged. > Thanks for your response, I've just updated the RFC accordingly. It solves the main issue indeed, and we still have the possibility to add a second factory method using the $recurrences parameter later if we deem it useful at some point. With all that said, I don't want to update the RFC anymore, so I plan to start the vote on Monday. Regards, Máté