On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 9:41 PM Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+...@gmail.com> wrote:
Being able to update a readonly property even if __clone already touched it > looks critical to me because otherwise, it'd mean that adding a __clone > method after publishing a first version of some class that has no __clone > method would be a BC break. > Great input. Thank you Nicolas. While this only applies to `public public(set) readonly` protected readonly properties that are also then *touched* in the new clone method, it is indeed an E_FATAL with the current implementation. For these cases, that would indeed be an annoying gotcha, even if I don't have an example at hand, it might make sense to me to account for it. I'll update the RFC and publish a changelog on Monday, and I'll mention that there once I had another look at the implementation. -- Volker Dusch Head of Engineering Tideways GmbH Königswinterer Str. 116 53227 Bonn https://tideways.io/imprint Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn Geschäftsführer: Benjamin Außenhofer (geb. Eberlei) Registergericht: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 22127
