Re: Property Accessors v1.2 : Interfaces
| From: | Clint Priest | Date: | Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:02:42 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Property Accessors v1.2 : Interfaces | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-63421@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Because fundamentally interfaces are designed to explain a way of communicating and properties are
symmetrical and non-observable.
The implementing class cannot "know" when a property has changed.
-Clint
On Oct 15, 2012, at 9:37 AM, "Levi Morrison" <morrison.levi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I *think* we are on the same page here, though I'm not sure what 'user' is
>> referring to (user of interface "implementer") or (user of class B). In any case, I
>> don't believe that your class B would be allowed at present, but if it is, then it should not
>> be allowed because defining a property to satisfy the requirements of an accessor is not right.
>
> According to whom? In my opinion, not allowing a property to satisfy
> the requirement of an accessor is wrong.