Re: Property Overloading RFC

Hello David, if we stay with abstract then it doesn't (actually it was a proposal from me from 13 month ago not open discussed). The other point you said it would make it non virtual by declaring it, that's plain wrong. Even after declaring you'd be able to do lazy initialization. And that's the most important aspect of the whole thing. marcus Friday, August 26, 2005, 12:23:13 AM, you wrote: > I have to say I still don't get the point of this. If you're declaring > virtual properties, you can just use normal declare normal, non-virtual > variables just as well. It's pointless if you ask me. They're not virtual > anymore if you're declaring them beforehand. _This_ would be something that > adds _real_ complexity to the language. And it introduces a new keyword, > too. > - David >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Lukas Smith [mailto:lsmith@php.net] >> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 12:03 AM >> To: Derick Rethans >> Cc: PHP Developers Mailing List; Jan Borsodi; Raymond Bosman; Frederik >> Holljen; Tobias Schlitt >> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Property Overloading RFC >> >> Derick Rethans wrote: >> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Derick Rethans wrote: >> >> > I updated the proposal: >> > >> > http://files.derickrethans.nl/property_overloading.html >> >> 1) seems to be an issue in doxygen and phpDocumentor >> >> 2) this seems solveable with a non public set of arrays containing >> information about the property and its visibility .. >> >> with a bit of hacking phpDocumentor could even read this information if >> they/we decide on a suggested nameing standard. i dont see why we should >> pollute the php language with this though >> >> 3) sounds like a great idea. we should also have something like this for >> __call(). >> >> regards, >> Lukas >> >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> Best regards, Marcus