Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Deprecate dynamic properties

This is only part of a thread. view whole thread
August 25, 2021 14:08 (Pierre)
Le 25/08/2021 à 15:51, Rowan Tommins a écrit :
> On 25/08/2021 13:45, Nikita Popov wrote: > >> We obviously need to keep support for dynamic properties on stdClass, >> and if we do so, I would expect that to apply to subclasses as well. > > Does that actually follow, though? Right now, there is no advantage to > extending stdClass, so no reason to expect existing code to do so, and > no reason for people doing so to expect it to affect behaviour. > > >> Second, I consider "extends stdClass" to be something of a last-ditch >> option. If you encounter a dynamic property deprecation warning, you >> should generally resolve it in some other way, and only fall back to >> "extends stdClass" as the final option. > > > That's a reasonable argument in terms of the multiple inheritance case. > > My concern about the name remains though: people already do get > confused by the name "stdClass", because it's not in any way > "standard", and tells you nothing about what it does. > > Reading "class Foo extends stdClass" gives the reader no clues what > magic behaviour is being inherited; "class Foo extends DynamicObject" > would be much more clear. Similarly, "$foo = new DynamicObject; > $foo->bar = 42;" is clearer than "$foo = new stdClass; $foo->bar = 42;" > > Regards, > Hello,
And why not adding an extra keyword, such as: ``` ``` Regards, -- Pierre
August 25, 2021 14:18 ("Levi Morrison via internals")
> And why not adding an extra keyword, such as: > > ``` > dynamic class Foo { } // Dynamic allowed > class Bar {} // Dynamic disallowed > ?> > ```
I am opposed. IMO it's not worth adding anything to the language to preserve this existing behavior other than allowing `__get`/`__set`, etc, which already exist for this purpose. Additionally, there are technical benefits to removing dynamic properties altogether, so I don't think we should "half" remove it. See