Re: RFC: short and inner classes

From: Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 06:23:21 +0000
Subject: Re: RFC: short and inner classes
References: 1 2  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message


On Thu, Mar 6, 2025, at 02:08, Juris Evertovskis wrote:
> Hi,
>  
> Maybe I didn’t read the RFC carefully enough, but… Do any of these features require the
> other one?
>  
> I’m asking because I wouldn’t want to see them both denied just because the voters disagree
> with one of them.
>  
> Good luck with this proposal!
>  
> Juris

Hi Juris,

Yes and no. Without the short syntax, classes explode in size if you just want to have simple inner
classes for DTO/organization. For example, I used this for quite a bit over the last couple of
weeks. One big usage, from my experiments, was to replace array returns:

class StringList(public array $strings);

And it makes it “easy on the eyes” to just have a list of classes at the top of the class. By
itself, a short syntax makes some sense, but isn’t compelling (IMHO), and inner classes cause an
explosion in LoC without it.

So, technically, they aren’t required to be in the same RFC; but also, they complement each other
very well.

If the RFC fails due to them being together, I’ll take the feedback and go back to the drawing
board.

— Rob


Thread (102 messages)

« previous php.internals (#126593) next »