Re: [RFC] Property Accessors v1.2 : Internal Accessor Method Visibility / Callability

Hi! > Stas, you seem to have missed the point behind my mail. This wasn't > about what the exact details of the implementation will be, the > message was that the semantics of a dedicated accessors syntax and the > semantics of a magic implementation can not match. I see your point now, thanks, but I don't think I agree. > > E.g. assuming that magic accessors take priority over properties as > you want it this time I can just turn the examples around: > > class A { > public $foo { get() { ... } set($value) { ... } } > } > > class B extends A { > public $foo; > } > > => Here I would expect that public $foo from class B overrides public > $foo from class A. I'm not sure why you are expecting this, and also this is probably an LSP violation, since such override would change semantics of the value that A clients expect. It may be possible to implement, technically, but I'm not sure it's the right thing to do. > Basically any kind of interaction between properties and accessor > properties will be broken and inherently so, simply because magic > methods are not real properties (quite obviously...). Magic methods are not properties, they are implementation of properties. But your properties aren't either - see discussion about interfaces, etc. They simulate regular properties but they aren't regular properties. E.g., what would happen if you serialize an object with simulated property? -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227