Re: [RFC] Propety Accessors v1.1

Just a couple of quick remarks. Clint wrote: > I'm not even sure that automatic backing fields are even desired, I never felt the need to have them in C# and the only reason they were included is because they were a part of Dennis's original proposal. Automatic backing fields are indeed necessary in C# for various technical reasons none of which have any bearing on the PHP language - Nikita explained this in another e-mail. So I vote for dropping automatic auto-implemented accessors. In PHP, an auto-implemented accessor really would be almost identical to a regular property anyhow. I would also add that the double-underscore convention for the field-name seems somewhat spooky to me - double-underscore is generally reserved for PHP internal stuff... now suddenly these would be userland-fields. Seems wrong. Clint, I am sorry these issue were not surfaced earlier... I do seem to recall sending a very long e-mail highlighting many of these issues a long while back though (?) ... I only watch the list with half an eye, but I usually speak up when I feel strongly about something. You're doing a great job here! I hope you you will see it through - this would be a fantastic feature which will make for better code architecture in so many ways.