RE: [PHP-DEV] [PHP-DEV [RFC] Property Accessors v1.2
| From: | Christian Stoller | Date: | Fri, 12 Oct 2012 12:23:02 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PHP-DEV] [PHP-DEV [RFC] Property Accessors v1.2 | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-63374@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Good hint, Nikita.
I like the feature of automatic properies. For the problems with unauthorized access: What about
signing automated generated "variables", so that they are only accessable through the
property?
@Lester Caine: This properties do not break backward compatibility. If you do not want to use it,
you do not need.
I like them because they offer an easy, short and well readable way to protected object or class
variables.
Best regards
Christian Stoller
-----Original Message-----
From: Nikita Popov [mailto:nikita.ppv@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 12:48 PM
To: Clint Priest
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [PHP-DEV [RFC] Property Accessors v1.2
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Clint Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com> wrote:
> Alright, here is the updated RFC as per discussions for the last few days:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/propertygetsetsyntax-as-implemented
>
> If you could read it over, make sure I have all of your concerns correctly addressed and we can
> leave this open for the two week waiting period while I make the final code changes.
>
> -Clint
I've been thinking a bit about the automatic properties again, and
noticed that I forgot to name one use case: Asymmetric accessor
visibility. Automatic properties may be useful in that context, so
that you can write "public $foo { get; protected set; }" (though they
don't necessarily need to be implemented as properties with auto
generated code, rather just properties with more detailed visibility
handling [a bit related to the stuff Amaury has been saying]).
Nikita
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php