Hi Tim
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 7:54 PM Tim Düsterhus wrote:
>
> One thing that would get pretty wonky would be private-read properties:
> Private property names are currently internally "mangled" to include the
> class name. This allows to define the same private property in multiple
> classes of
On Wed, 5 Jun 2024 at 19:59, Claude Pache wrote:
> *snip*
> Hi Larry and Ilija,
>
> Thanks for your work. Here is my opinion:
>
> First, I do think that `readonly` should integrate with aviz, unless that
> implies truly controversial changes on `readonly`. As Theodore Brown
> commented in the
Hi
On 6/5/24 17:25, Nicolas Grekas wrote:
Yes!
See https://github.com/nicolas-grekas/symfony/pull/44 for Symfony. All the
complex code is gone \o/
[...]
For Doctrine, the URL is
https://github.com/nicolas-grekas/doctrine-orm/pull/6 for now, with the
most important line being the removal of the
Hi
Thank you Larry for your email. Your suggested API is basically what I
also had in mind after Arnaud's clarification.
On 6/5/24 20:06, Arnaud Le Blanc wrote:
I think you got the two strategies right. However, there is a use-case
in which an object manages its own laziness by making itself
Hi
Working through your reply in order of the email, without any
backtracking, because the complexity of this topic makes it hard to keep
the entire email in mind. This might mean that I am asking follow-up
questions that you already answered further down. Please apologize if
that is the
Hi Larry,
Thank you for the feedback.
I think you got the two strategies right. However, there is a use-case
in which an object manages its own laziness by making itself lazy:
```
class C {
public function __construct() {
ReflectionLazyObject::makeLazyGhost($this,
On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 6:58 PM Nicolas Grekas
wrote:
>
> Hi Tim,
>
> Thanks for the detailed feedback. Arnaud already answered most of your
> questions, here is the remaining one:
>
>> On 6/4/24 14:28, Nicolas Grekas wrote:
>> > Please find all the details here:
>> >
> Le 5 juin 2024 à 16:28, Larry Garfield a écrit :
>
> On Fri, May 31, 2024, at 8:59 PM, Larry Garfield wrote:
>> On Fri, May 31, 2024, at 5:45 PM, Claude Pache wrote:
Le 31 mai 2024 à 18:08, Larry Garfield a écrit :
However, this also brings up another interesting issue:
On 22/05/2024 20:03, Niels Dossche wrote:
> Hi internals
>
> I'm starting discussion on my new RFC "New ext-dom features in PHP 8.4".
> RFC link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/dom_additions_84
>
> Kind regards
> Niels
Hi internals
It's been two weeks since I announced the RFC, and it's been very
On Wed, Jun 5, 2024, at 2:50 PM, Arnaud Le Blanc wrote:
> Good point. The Mutex constructor is called during "new Mutex()", but
> the object is made lazy after that, and the destructor is never
> called.
>
> We have made the following changes to the RFC:
>
> - makeLazyGhost / makeLazyProxy will
Hi Tim,
Thanks for the detailed feedback. Arnaud already answered most of your
questions, here is the remaining one:
On 6/4/24 14:28, Nicolas Grekas wrote:
> > Please find all the details here:
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/lazy-objects
> >
> > We look forward to your thoughts and feedback.
>
>
Hi Tim,
That's a lot of interesting feedback. I will try to answer some of
your points, and Nicolas will follow with other points.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 9:16 PM Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> - int $options = 0
>
> Not a fan of flag parameters that take a bitset, those provide for a
> terrible DX due
On Fri, May 31, 2024, at 8:59 PM, Larry Garfield wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2024, at 5:45 PM, Claude Pache wrote:
>>> Le 31 mai 2024 à 18:08, Larry Garfield a écrit :
>>>
>>> However, this also brings up another interesting issue: readonly properties
>>> (in 8.3) DO allow redeclaration,
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 10:23 PM Tim Düsterhus wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> On 6/4/24 14:28, Nicolas Grekas wrote:
> > Please find all the details here:
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/lazy-objects
> >
> > We look forward to your thoughts and feedback.
>
> I've gave the RFC three or four passes and I'm not
Hi Tim,
Thanks for the clarification. I don’t have something for which I’d create
an RFC right away. I’m fine with not having edit permission if it is given
only in that case.
Best
*Bilal Gültekin*
4 Haz 2024 Sal, saat 20:48 tarihinde Tim Düsterhus şunu
yazdı:
> Hi
>
> On 6/4/24 13:57, Bilal
On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 9:22 AM Benjamin Außenhofer
wrote:
> The vote for the RFC #[\Deprecated] attribute is now open:
>
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/deprecated_attribute
>
> Voting will close on Wednesday 5th June, 08:00 GMT.
>
The #[\Deprecated] attribute has been accepted with 23 (Yes) to 6
16 matches
Mail list logo
