Hi Matthew,
> We've just opened the vote for the "Readonly amendments" RFC, which is > > going to be open for 2 weeks (until 2023-02-07). > > > > Link: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_amendments > > Discussion: https://externals.io/message/119007 > > > > I missed something when reviewing previously. > > Under the Proposal 1 section is the following verbiage: > > > readonly classes can declare neither static, nor untyped properties, no > matter if the declaration is done directly in the class or indirectly via a > trait (https://github.com/php/php-src/issues/9285). Under this RFC, their > non-readonly child classes would support them as any other child class > does. > > However, the example demonstrates neither static nor untyped properties. As > such, it's hard to understand what pattern you are trying to enable here. > Could you provide an example of a child class that uses static and/or > untyped properties, please? Basically trying to understand what this would > enable, and why. > We've added a few examples on the RFC that should help clarify. Here is the link to the diff: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_amendments?do=diff&rev2%5B0%5D=1674550446&rev2%5B1%5D=1674635113&difftype=sidebyside And the link to the updated RFC of course: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/readonly_amendments Nicolas
