Re: [RFC] Readonly Properties

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano@seld.be> wrote: > On 27/10/2014 20:27, Andrea Faulds wrote: >> >> Tentative syntax. But this way, the visibility stays on the left. I think >> that’s good for readability. If you omit the second specifier, then the >> first one applies to getting and setting, as now. If you include it, the >> first one applies to getting, the second one to setting. >> >> It’d also be compatible with properties, too: >> >> public/private $foobar { >> get { return $this->bar * $this->foo; } >> set($value) { $this->bar = $value / $this->foo; } >> } >> >> It doesn’t prevent truly read-only properties, either: >> >> public $foobar { >> get { return $this->bar * $this->foo; } >> } >> >> Does this sound like a good idea? A similar idea came up in the >> discussions 8 years ago on readonly. > > > I like it, except for the fact that if you add a custom getter to a property > suddenly it becomes readonly unless you remember to add "; set" to the end > of the block, right? > > How about this instead for readonly: > > public $foobar { > get { return $this->bar * $this->foo; }; readonly > } > > And if the flag isn't there, set is implicitly present. > > That'd mean you also can keep "public readonly $foobar;" as a shorthand for > readonly properties without custom getter. I like this idea. Also confirmed what I was trying to say: While we can have many RFCs covering the properties properties and behavior, having one covering the needs in one go will allow us to be more consistent and developer friendly. -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org