On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:26 PM Dan Ackroyd wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 10:52, Nikita Popov wrote:
> >
> > Please tell me if you have further concerns
>
> Question - as this is just sugar, presumably it doesn't add much
> complexity to the PHP engine?
>
Yes, the implementation complexity
On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 10:52, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> Please tell me if you have further concerns
Question - as this is just sugar, presumably it doesn't add much
complexity to the PHP engine?
Vague concern - because it's a novel syntax, I find it hard to read,
particularly when there are
On Wed, May 6, 2020, at 3:31 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:27 PM Larry Garfield
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 5, 2020, at 7:35 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Performing validation when the getAttributes() call is performed does
> > sound
> > > reasonable to me. We can
On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:27 PM Larry Garfield
wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2020, at 7:35 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
>
>
> > Performing validation when the getAttributes() call is performed does
> sound
> > reasonable to me. We can also add a class flag to perform this validation
> > only once (if it is
On Tue, May 5, 2020, at 7:35 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Performing validation when the getAttributes() call is performed does sound
> reasonable to me. We can also add a class flag to perform this validation
> only once (if it is successful), so the cost doesn't have to be paid by
> every single
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:27 AM Benjamin Eberlei
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:07 AM Nikita Popov
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:56 AM Benjamin Eberlei
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:47 AM Nicolas Grekas <
>>> nicolas.grekas+...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:07 AM Nikita Popov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:56 AM Benjamin Eberlei
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:47 AM Nicolas Grekas <
>> nicolas.grekas+...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > I think it might be best to apply to "both" and provide an isPromoted()
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:56 AM Benjamin Eberlei
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:47 AM Nicolas Grekas <
> nicolas.grekas+...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > I think it might be best to apply to "both" and provide an isPromoted()
>> > method on both ReflectionParameter and ReflectionProperty.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:47 AM Nicolas Grekas
wrote:
> > I think it might be best to apply to "both" and provide an isPromoted()
> > method on both ReflectionParameter and ReflectionProperty. Any code that
> > wishes to validate the allowed positions of an attribute can then skip
> >
> I think it might be best to apply to "both" and provide an isPromoted()
> method on both ReflectionParameter and ReflectionProperty. Any code that
> wishes to validate the allowed positions of an attribute can then skip
> properties/parameters that report isPromoted() as true, to avoid reporting
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:05 AM Larry Garfield
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020, at 10:56 AM, Nicolas Grekas wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would expect attributes to apply only to the properties on my side.
> > >
> > > Parameter annotations could be interesting for dependency injection.
> > > Symfony
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020, at 10:56 AM, Nicolas Grekas wrote:
> >
> > > I would expect attributes to apply only to the properties on my side.
> >
> > Parameter annotations could be interesting for dependency injection.
> > Symfony currently has some DI magic through parameter names among
> > other
>
> > I would expect attributes to apply only to the properties on my side.
>
> Parameter annotations could be interesting for dependency injection.
> Symfony currently has some DI magic through parameter names among
> other things. It might be nice to control these through annotations
> instead.
Hi Nicolas
> I would expect attributes to apply only to the properties on my side.
Parameter annotations could be interesting for dependency injection.
Symfony currently has some DI magic through parameter names among
other things. It might be nice to control these through annotations
instead.
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 2:30 PM Nikita Popov wrote:
>
> > Hi internals,
> >
> > I would like to submit the following RFC for your consideration:
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/constructor_promotion
> >
> > This is based on one off the suggestions made in
> > https://externals.io/message/109220,
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:17 PM Dmitry Stogov wrote:
> Hi Nikita,
>
> Personally, I don't see a big reason in introduction this syntax sugar.
> It allows to make class declaration more compact but less readable.
>
> Also, this feature doesn't work well with inheritance. RFC doesn't provide
> any
16 matches
Mail list logo
