Hi everyone Heads-up: Larry and I would like to start the vote of the property hooks RFC tomorrow: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/property-hooks
We have worked long and hard on this RFC, and hope that we have found some middle-ground that works for the majority. One last concern we have not officially clarified on the list: https://externals.io/message/122445#122667 >> I personally do not feel strongly about whether asymmetric types make it >> into the initial implementation. Larry does, however, and I think it is not >> fair to exclude them without providing any concrete reasons not to. [snip] > > My concern is more about the external impact of what is effectively a change > to the type system of the language: [snip] will tools like PhpStan and Psalm > require complex changes to analyse code using such properties? In particular, this paragraph is referencing the ability to widen the accepted $value parameter type of the set hook, described at the bottom of https://wiki.php.net/rfc/property-hooks#set. I have talked to Ondřej Mirtes, the maintainer of PHPStan, and he confirmed that this should not be complex to implement in PHPStan. In fact, PHPStan already offers the @property-read and @property-write class annotations, which can be used to describe "virtual" properties handled within __get/__set, already providing asymmetric types of sorts. Hence, this concern should be a non-issue. Thank you to everybody who has contributed to the discussion! Ilija
