Hi
On 11/9/25 16:33, Larry Garfield wrote:
In particular, the syntax is a hard-no. It runs contrary to how the aviz
syntax was defined, as others have already noted.
If you don't want to use `internal(set)` to save `internal` for some other use, that's
fine. Come up with a different keyword. :-) But <allowed scope>(<operation>)
is the syntax model that aviz established, and tossing extra parens in there just confuses
things for everyone.
I agree with that.
If it really does need to be an entirely separate dimension of scoping, then I
would argue it's too complex to capture in just keywords and Rowan's attribute
proposal becomes even more compelling.
I disagree that this should be an Attribute for the inverse of the
reasons of why `#[\Override]` *is* an attribute:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/marking_overriden_methods#why_an_attribute_and_not_a_keyword
Visibility is part of the public API and by making this an attribute,
the code will seemingly appear to work in older PHP version that do not
yet know about the attribute, but its behavior will differ.
It would of course also be syntactically / visually inconsistent with
any other visibility definition.
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
