Re: a couple of thoughts on the DateTime type debate

You're right, struct isn't the right word - "value" is probably more accurate. value Color { public $r = 1.0; public $g = 1.0; public $b = 1.0; public function __construct($r, $g, $b) { $this->r = $r; $this->g = $g; $this->b = $b; } public function mix(Color $other, $amount) { $this->r = $other->r * $amount + $this->r * (1 - $amount); $this->g = $other->g * $amount + $this->g * (1 - $amount); $this->b = $other->b * $amount + $this->b * (1 - $amount); return $this; } } $red = new Color(1, 0, 0); $blue = new Color(0, 0, 1); $mix = $red->mix($blue); Okay, this would probably work - since $this actually refers to an array inside the mix() method scope, the array would be copied as soon as the first assignment is made... but I can see how this is starting to look rather confusing, given that it clashes with existing syntax and how actual objects currently work... Probably not a good idea after all... Though I still wish there was some better way to handle value-types... On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Benjamin Eberlei <kontakt@beberlei.de>wrote: > > structs as in c# don't have methods, however DateTime has them. so this > doesn't work. What you can do is just pass all the data in the constructor > and then don't change it, and you have your value type that is immutable. > It just requires a bit self control. > >