Re: [VOTE] Allow Reassignment of Promoted Readonly Properties in Constructor

On 24 March 2026 14:06:53 GMT, "Michał Marcin Brzuchalski" <michal.brzuchalski@gmail.com> wrote: >So while I understand the motivation behind the RFC, I think this moves >readonly further toward special-case behavior, when it would be better to >keep it strict and predictable. I agree with Ilija and Michal here. I can see why this might seem useful, but the detailed rules feel very complicated, weakening the value of "readonly". I think it also weakens the premise of CPP, which was to merge *three* pieces of code: the property declaration, the parameter declaration, and the assignment. Perhaps what's actually needed is a variant that only merges the *assignment* with the property declaration? That would then cover the case mentioned in the RFC with a change in type, as well as the "readonly" case: ``` class Config { public function __construct( ?string $cacheDir = null, ) { public readonly string $this->cacheDir = $cacheDir ?? sys_get_temp_dir() . '/app_cache'; } } ``` I'm not sure I love it, but it feels more consistent with the intention of both CPP and readonly. Regards, Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]