Re: Property Accessors 1.2 : parent::$foo Issue

On 1/13/2013 8:01 AM, Mark wrote:

I'm guessing this RFC won't make it in PHP 5.5? Too bad since it did seem like a very nice feature to have. I don't know if it is very helpful but posting nevertheless. I'm a C++/Qt/QML/PHP developer and for me the proposed syntax in the v1.2 document makes perfect sense and is intuitive to use. As for the earlier example about isset... i'd expect an example like this: class SomeClass {

     public $date {
         get;
         set(DateTime $date);
     }

} $temp = new SomeClass(); i'd expect "isset($temp->date)" to return exactly the same as if the class where defined like this: class SomeClass {

     public $date;

} That's correct, it will.

Furthermore, isset() will never throw an error, even if it would not be legal to call isset or get (from 1.1 RFC changes).

I don't know if that issue was already sorted out but i wanted to share my expectations in that regards. Will this make PHP 5.5? Or will it be deferred to 5.6? Nikita, Stas and I are working very hard to make it into 5.5, we expect to propose a vote sometime in the next couple of days.

** Any remaining feedback is appreciated, the RFC is being kept up to date w/ current understood consensus. ** -- -Clint