Re: [RFC] Default constructors

On 18/11/2014 23:07, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:

Hi!

Are you sure it was intended to work this way, with the parameters not being evaluated at all?

Of course, just look at how ZEND_NEW opcode is written. It's the only reason in has op2 there. That code is not a typo, it's intended to skip the function call.

I don't know the innards of the engine well enough to follow this, but it sounds like you're talking about skipping the evaluation of __construct() as a method if it doesn't exist as one, which is perfectly reasonable. However, the side effect that the *arguments* to that function call are not executed is surely an unintended side-effect of this, which was considered not important enough to worry about.

I personally am not completely sure it's worth the trouble - since, again, no sane code should ever rely on something like this - but maybe I'm wrong that there's a valid use case for this.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are referring to by "this" here. To quote an earlier example: $b = 0; $a = new Foo(++$b); Looks like pretty normal code to me; no reason to expect anything about the way class Foo is defined to affect its behaviour. No sane code should rely on that *not* incrementing $b, surely? -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]