Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 8, 2015, at 02:09, Andrea Faulds <a...@ajf.me> wrote: > > Hi Stas, > > Stanislav Malyshev wrote: >> >> Private and protected methods and properties are private for a reason - >> they may be radically changed or gone when the code is changing, and >> thus external code should not rely on them, and the way to ensure it is >> to deny that code access to them. However, I have hard time seeing how >> that would apply to constants - they shouldn't really change, > > Why not? A constant's value doesn't change at runtime, but nothing stops you > changing the value in a new version. A real-world example for you: phpng > changed the values of the IS_* constants in the Zend Engine. > >> and if >> they do, they either shouldn't be constant, or something in your world >> changed fundamentally (i.e. scientists discovered that PI actually >> equals to 4). > > Constants in code aren't necessarily natural constants. > > I wonder if you find in your code constant that you need >> to hide because you foresee it changing - should it really be a constant >> at all? > > If I have a value specified in the source code which will not change at > runtime, and which I don't want to expose as part of my public API... what > exactly do you propose it should be? I don't see why a constant isn't fitting. > public static final as Java does Thanks > Thanks. > > -- > Andrea Faulds > http://ajf.me/ > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
