read-only => final set null;
It begins to be verbose.
As I said many times, why don't you want to use the "const" keyword? It
already exists and is pretty well understood by everybody.
2012/10/20 Clint Priest <cpri...@zerocue.com>
> I had thought of a deviation on some of the ideas presented to get rid of
> read-only/write-only while still keeping the ability to maintain their
> effect, if we so decide that the feature is wanted. Here it is:
>
> class TimePeriod {
> private $Seconds;
>
> public $Hours {
> get() { return $this->Hours; }
> final set NULL;
> }
> }
>
> It's close to what's been suggested but is pretty clear that there IS NO
> SETTER it could not be called within the class and since its final it
> cannot be over-ridden. I've included this in the change tracking document.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Clint
>
>
>
