Re: [RFC Discussion] Typed Properties
| From: | Björn Larsson | Date: | Wed, 30 Mar 2016 20:44:20 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC Discussion] Typed Properties | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-92033@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Den 2016-03-29 kl. 22:38, skrev Phil Sturgeon:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Björn Larsson <bjorn.x.larsson@telia.com> wrote:class A {Den 2016-03-29 kl. 17:32, skrev Phil Sturgeon:Hey Björn, this RFC has literally zero impact on visibility keywords. You can use public, private, protected, you can omit it entirely or you can use var if you like. It makes no difference. I tried omitting public keyword from class declaration:I'd like to thank everyone for their feedback on this RFC! It looks like the majority of concerns were solved during the course of this discussion, which is great news. The RFC has been expanded in a few areas to take care of a few other concerns, so please go and review it and let me know if you have any feedback. https://wiki.php.net/rfc/typed-properties Voting will start in a few days. Cheers, PhilA question. Should the visibility keyword public be optional like it is for methods and static properties? Regards //Björn
public int $i = 3;} on https://3v4l.org/OFr2a/rfc#tabs and got error message. Anyway, appreciating the good work, both of you are doing in moving this proposal forward. Regards //Björn