Re: [RFC] Default constructors
| From: | Rowan Collins | Date: | Thu, 20 Nov 2014 09:36:47 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Default constructors | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-79027@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Stanislav Malyshev wrote on 20/11/2014 00:44:
Well, as others have pointed out, HHVM behaves differently in this case, so I guess what I'm getting at is: is this considered a feature *of the language*, or just a known oddity of the *implementation*? If it's part of the language, it should be standardised in the language spec, so that other implementations can emulate it (or decide to deviate from it); if not, then it seems appropriate to talk of "fixing" rather than "changing" it. -- Rowan Collins [IMSoP]This reminds me of the recent discussion over multiple defaults in aswitch. Perhaps as with that we should phrase the question as "is there any useful purpose to having the language standardised with this feature, and conversely is there any realistic harm in altering it?" You make it sound as if I'm somehow calling for some change in "standardizing" this feature. On the contrary, I am just preserving the status quo, it is as "standard" or "non-standard" as it has ever been.