Marcus, I'm a big fan of this keyword. No "pppp", and this is in fact clearer and better than the readonly keyword I advocated. Great idea :)
Ron "Marcus Boerger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in bericht news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Hello Jason, > > i changed from readonly to readable, which means the new keyword makes it > public for any read access, that is: > > private readable $abc; > - class itself can read and write > - public for everybody when reading, inside & outside of the class > > protected readable $abc; > - class itself can read and write > - sub-class can read and write > - public for everybody when reading, inside & outside of the class > > public readable $abc; > - just as public alone > > best regards > marcus > > Wednesday, May 17, 2006, 12:13:22 AM, you wrote: > >> Hello Marcus, > >> Is this correct? > >> >> private readable $abc; >> - doesn't make sense. >> >> protected readable $abc; >> - sub-class can read, not write >> - not visible outside class > >> public readable $abc; >> - sub-class can read, and write >> - outside class can read, not write > > >> If not, please clarify. >> Thanks! > >> -- >> Best regards, >> Jason mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 5:49:45 PM, you wrote: > > MB>> Hello Andi, > > MB>> nothing else needs to be fixed. The patch considers a reference as > a write > MB>> operation as well as anything else that doesn't identify itself as a > read > MB>> operation. And the enforcement itself just means that whatever you > define > MB>> besides readable is being ignored for read operations. > > MB>> best regards > MB>> marcus > > MB>> Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 11:41:31 PM, you wrote: > >>>> Where would readable be enforced? Would it try and prevent getting >>>> references to it? Are there any internal functions/classes which need >>>> fixing to honor readable? > >>>> I think these answers would really be helpful. > >>>> Thanks. > >>>> Andi > >>>> At 02:37 PM 5/16/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote: >>>>>Hello Andi, >>>>> >>>>> that is why most here already switched to "public readable". >>>>> >>>>>best regards >>>>>marcus >>>>> >>>>>Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 11:31:14 PM, you wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > I can't quite explain it but for me the ability to work-around >>>>> > private with methods which are able to access the private variable, >>>>> > is different than marking a property as read-only but it not being >>>>> > read-only in all semantics. Probably because private variables do >>>>> > often have getters and setters, whereas something which is marked as >>>>> > read-only (like a harddrive) tends to be read-only always. >>>>> >>>>> > Andi >>>>> >>>>> > At 02:08 PM 5/16/2006, Zeev Suraski wrote: >>>>> >>>However, the reason i write this mail is that you said there could >>>>> >>>be >>>>> >>>problems. Well this is deply integrated in the handlers and they >>>>> >>>don't >>>>> >>>let you out. In other words if this stuff is not working then the >>>>> >>>whole >>>>> >>>PHP 5+ object model is broken. Or in other words, if this is broken >>>>> >>>alot >>>>> >>>of other stuff regarding object handling is already broken. >>>>> >> >>>>> >>You're probably right about this one. You can already return a >>>>> >>reference to a private variable today and change it. Andi - did you >>>>> >>mean something else? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Best regards, >>>>> Marcus > > > > > MB>> Best regards, > MB>> Marcus > > > > > Best regards, > Marcus -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
