On Sun, Sep 11, 2022 at 8:22 AM Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
> > > Hm. I seem to recall during the discussion of readonly classes someone > saying that object properties of a readonly class had to also be readonly > classes, which would render the above code a compile error. However, I > just checked and that is not in the RFC. Was it removed? Am I imagining > things? Anyone else know what I'm talking about? :-) > > --Larry Garfield > > I remembered the same thing, and am similarly baffled. How did the RFC pass if you can do something as simple as `public readonly stdClass $var;`? I thought I followed the discussion on that RFC, but apparently I missed something. I would have expected an example like above to block acceptance of the RFC. To be clear though, I'm mostly confused about what the convincing argument about this was, or if it was something that everyone else viewed as an uncontroversial aspect? Jordan
