Re: [RFC] Accessors : read-only / write-only keywords
| From: | Amaury Bouchard | Date: | Sun, 21 Oct 2012 19:02:12 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Accessors : read-only / write-only keywords | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-63596@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
I don't disagree (sure, I campaigned to remove the "read-only" keyword).
But "not writable" is still different from "private writing". Should we
loose any of these meanings?
2012/10/21 Clint Priest <cpriest@zerocue.com>
> I think that seems to be the consensus at this point, anyone disagree?
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Levi Morrison [mailto:morrison.levi@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 10:26 AM
> > To: Amaury Bouchard
> > Cc: Nikita Popov; Clint Priest; internals@lists.php.net
> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Accessors : read-only / write-only keywords
> >
> > > If for some reason you need to enforce that nobody inherits it and
> > > sets the property, then declaring a setter and issuing an error or
> > > exception would suffice.
> >
> > I meant to say declaring a
private or final setter.
> > Noticed that
> after I sent it.
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>