[PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for inclusion in 5.5 release. Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make this happen for 5.5, voting and the specifications are here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/propertygetsetsyntax-v1.2#voting Thanks, -

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for inclusion > in 5.5 release. > > Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make > this happen for 5.5, voting and the specifications are here: > > https:

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/17/13 1:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for inclusion in 5.5 release. Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make this happen for 5.5, voting and the specifications are here: > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/p

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/17/2013 4:24 PM, Steve Clay wrote: > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/propertygetsetsyntax-v1.2#voting I'll say my peace on this. This is a very good implementation, and as long as authors use accessors that depend on a separate property for storage (like other langs require), everything will be

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > > On 1/17/2013 4:24 PM, Steve Clay wrote: > >> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/**propertygetsetsyntax-v1.2#**voting >> >> I'll say my peace on this. This is a very good implementation, and

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Sherif Ramadan wrote: > I'm not sure if this has already come up in past discussion or not. So > I apologize in advance if this is repetitive. The discussion for property > accessors has been so lengthy I couldn't find the time to keep up with it > all. > > However

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Nikita Popov wrote: > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Sherif Ramadan > wrote: > >> I'm not sure if this has already come up in past discussion or not. So >> I apologize in advance if this is repetitive. The discussion for property >> accessors has been so length

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:35:14 +0100, Sherif Ramadan wrote: What I'm saying is this kind of behavior needs far more serious reasoning than the very naive assesment you're making above. I mean that with all due respect. Just wondering if there is another take on this from anyone else? I think

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Gustavo Lopes wrote: > On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:35:14 +0100, Sherif Ramadan < > theanomaly...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> What I'm saying is this kind of behavior needs far more serious reasoning >> than the very naive assesment you're making above. >> >> I mean that with

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:52:36 +0100, Sherif Ramadan wrote: I think the current behavior is most appropriate one for var_dump() (and array casts/get_object_vars()). It's the same behavior as if you had manually defined getXXX() methods or used __get(). It's actually not the same behavior at a

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/20/2013 7:35 AM, Sherif Ramadan wrote: Now $surface shows us the following from var_dump object(surface)#1 (3) { ["area"]=> NULL ["width"]=> int(4) ["height"]=> int(2) } Sounds like a reasonable approach to me... var_dump() 1) Should not invoke the getters.. 2) Should ind

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > > On 1/20/2013 7:35 AM, Sherif Ramadan wrote: > > Now $surface shows us the following from var_dump > > object(surface)#1 (3) { > ["area"]=> > NULL > ["width"]=> > int(4) > ["height"]=> > int(2) > } > > Sounds like a reaso

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Am 17.01.2013 19:20, schrieb Clint Priest: I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for inclusion in 5.5 release. Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make this happen for 5.5, voting and the specifications are here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/pro

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Hello Clint, Nikita and Stas. > To facilitate complete functionality with properties it is necessary to > provide accessor functions to act on isset() and unset() calls. > Note: isset & unset implementations are always provided with default > implementations unless the author explicitly defines t

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/20/2013 3:11 PM, Gordon Oheim wrote: Am 17.01.2013 19:20, schrieb Clint Priest: I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for inclusion in 5.5 release. Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make this happen for 5.5, voting and the specificat

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/17/2013 12:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for inclusion in 5.5 release. Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make this happen for 5.5, voting and the specifications are here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Clint Priest wrote: There seems to be a lot of userland support for this proposal from people who don't have voting rights. And what about the userland people who don't want the additional complexity who don't have voting rights? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

@Lester seems pretty much opt-in to me :) Marco Pivetta http://twitter.com/Ocramius http://ocramius.github.com/

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

2013/1/22 Lester Caine > Clint Priest wrote: > >> There seems to be a lot of userland support for this proposal from people >> who >> don't have voting rights. >> > > And what about the userland people who don't want the additional > complexity who don't have voting rights? Don't use it. Regard

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Sebastian Krebs wrote: Clint Priest wrote: There seems to be a lot of userland support for this proposal from people who don't have voting rights. And what about the userland people who don't want the additional complexity who don't have voting rights? Don't

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

@Lester your explanation simply exposes the fact that your resources to upgrade to newer technologies are insufficient. This doesn't mean that newer technologies don't have to exist. And no, it won't be possible to fix all bugs/flaws before getting a new feature. We'd all be running in circles loo

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/22/2013 6:55 AM, Marco Pivetta wrote: @Lester your explanation simply exposes the fact that your resources to upgrade to newer technologies are insufficient. This doesn't mean that newer technologies don't have to exist. And no, it won't be possible to fix all bugs/flaws before getting a n

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Clint Priest wrote: And no, it won't be possible to fix all bugs/flaws before getting a new feature. We'd all be running in circles looking for perfection :) I can agree that some things need fixing though, perhaps Lester could put together an RFC detailing the myriad of things he deems critical

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

> For those that have voted against this proposal, are there any > clarifications that can be made or questions answered? I can say that this bit is particularly confusing: public $foo {} My understanding that this code will not emit any warnings when interpreted, but the $foo property has n

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Am 22.01.2013 02:46, schrieb Clint Priest: On 1/20/2013 3:11 PM, Gordon Oheim wrote: Am 17.01.2013 19:20, schrieb Clint Priest: I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for inclusion in 5.5 release. Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make th

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 01/22/2013 03:18 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > > On 1/17/2013 12:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: >> I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for >> inclusion in 5.5 release. >> >> Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to >> make this happen for 5.5, voting a

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > The simple explanation from me is that the ROI isn't there on this one. > It adds a lot of code complexity for very little return. Yes, it saves a > couple of lines of boilerplate code for a few people, but the cost is > high in terms of on

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/22/2013 11:20 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: On 01/22/2013 03:18 AM, Clint Priest wrote: For those that have voted against this proposal, are there any clarifications that can be made or questions answered? There seems to be a lot of userland support for this proposal from people who don't hav

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/22/2013 9:24 AM, Levi Morrison wrote: For those that have voted against this proposal, are there any clarifications that can be made or questions answered? I can say that this bit is particularly confusing: public $foo {} My understanding that this code will not emit any warnings whe

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Am 22.01.2013 22:27, schrieb Clint Priest: property accessors and magic accessors use the same pre/post function and logic So this is the reason for some "magic" behaviour of "property accessors". Logically "property accessors" may be a subset of "magic accessors" but not the other way around.

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 01/22/2013 01:27 PM, Clint Priest wrote: In terms of cost of maintenance, I was under the impression that since I wrote it, I would be maintaining it which is why I applied for and you approved a VCS account for me. The concern is historical and not personal. Frequently the long-term cont

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Jan 22, 2013, at 6:00 PM, Christopher Jones wrote: > On 01/22/2013 01:27 PM, Clint Priest wrote: >> In terms of cost of maintenance, I was under the impression that >> since I wrote it, I would be maintaining it which is why I applied >> for and you approved a VCS account for me. > > The co

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Rasmus, If you look at the split in voting you will notice it is > pretty much split along the lines of the people who have to maintain > this code vs. the people who would like a shiny new feature. > I pulled some numbers, and this isn't really the case. Based off of commits from the past year

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 01/22/2013 04:41 PM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Rasmus, > > If you look at the split in voting you will notice it is > pretty much split along the lines of the people who have to maintain > this code vs. the people who would like a shiny new feature. > > > I pulled some numbers, and

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Rasmus, Now do 5 or even 10+ years and commits to Zend and APC. We are talking > about a core language feature here, so commits to the code most affected > is what you should be looking at and when I talk about maintenance I > talk about code we are fixing 10 years from now. Commits in the past >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Rasmus, > > Now do 5 or even 10+ years and commits to Zend and APC. We are talking >> about a core language feature here, so commits to the code most affected >> is what you should be looking at and when I talk about maintenance I >> talk a

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

hi Rasmus, On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > The simple explanation from me is that the ROI isn't there on this one. > It adds a lot of code complexity for very little return. Yes, it saves a > couple of lines of boilerplate code for a few people, but the cost is > high in

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 01/23/2013 01:15 AM, Pierre Joye wrote: > About opcode cache complexity, I think apc per se is full of things we > should simplify or drop as features to make the code base much smaller > and much easier to test and valid, we have discussed that already and > we disagreed. But this is a topic I

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 01/22/2013 03:18 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > > > > On 1/17/2013 12:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > >> I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for > >> inclusion in 5.5 release. > >> > >> Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bi

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Benjamin Eberlei wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf > wrote: > > > On 01/22/2013 03:18 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > > > > > > On 1/17/2013 12:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > > >> I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for > >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > On 01/22/2013 03:18 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > > > > On 1/17/2013 12:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > >> I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for > >> inclusion in 5.5 release. > >> > >> Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bi

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > > On 1/17/2013 12:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > >> I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for >> inclusion in 5.5 release. >> >> Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make >> this happen for 5

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

Sherif, Don't get me wrong, I liked it, but I also disliked the fact that it > introduces language changes that aren't easy to grasp or document. To me > this means we've borderline changed the behavior of a property (which most > PHP users currently understand to be a variable) into potential me

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote: > Sherif, > > > Don't get me wrong, I liked it, but I also disliked the fact that it >> introduces language changes that aren't easy to grasp or document. To me >> this means we've borderline changed the behavior of a property (which most >>

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/23/2013 8:31 AM, Sherif Ramadan wrote: Except that everything that's proposed here is possible today with __get, __set, __isset and __unset. So already today you can't assume that a property is a "variable". In fact, you could build something like this using __get, etc extremely dirty: cla

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > > Actually you could say that last sentence is precisely opposite of the > truth in that a var_dump() will *never* expose properties that are > available via a magic __get() therefore a var_dump() already mis-leads the > developer because th

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 23 January 2013 19:53, Sherif Ramadan wrote: > > They're not shown because they don't exist. Thus no confusion about whether > this is a property or not. If it's a property we can see it in > var_dump($obj). If it's magic you can only see it in > var_dump($obj->property). With accessors you se

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/23/2013 1:00 PM, Marco Pivetta wrote: Actually, having the properties shown even if virtual allows us to access them in a reflection-ish manner without doing dangerous assumptions like "does the setter/getter exist"? The fact that the property is virtual is very useful, even though in

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Clint Priest wrote: > > On 1/23/2013 1:00 PM, Marco Pivetta wrote: >> >> >> Actually, having the properties shown even if virtual allows us to access >> them in a reflection-ish manner without doing dangerous assumptions like >> "does the setter/getter exist"? >> >

Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Property Accessors for 5.5

On 1/17/2013 12:20 PM, Clint Priest wrote: I'm happy to say that Property Accessors is ready for a vote for inclusion in 5.5 release. Nikita and I (as well as Stas a bit) have all been working hard to make this happen for 5.5, voting and the specifications are here: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/