Re: [RFC] isReadable/isWriteable property reflection
On Fri, Nov 7, 2025, at 5:03 AM, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 2025-11-06 00:24, schrieb Larry Garfield:
>> In other news, Ilija and I said a year ago that we'd take a swing at
>> adding isReadable/isWriteable methods to ReflectionProperty. Took a
>> while, but here we are. A strangely small RFC from us:
>>
>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/isreadable-iswriteable
>
> I dislike implicitly “scope-dependent” functions, since they effectively
> act like magic. This probably makes it harder to understand for humans
> and static analysis tools alike. I would therefore suggest making the
> $scope parameter required. A user can just pass static::class
> themselves and static analysis tools can use class-string|null instead
> of class-string|"static"|null as their expected parameter type.
Given that the 90% or more case is likely to be "from my current context", making that the
default seems the most ergonomic. (The counter argument, I suppose, is that this is hardly going to
be a super-common routine to call so ergonomics don't matter.)
stack-inspection isn't new. Closure::getCurrent() is the most recent example, so
we don't think it's especially problematic.
If there's a preference for avoiding magic strings, it would be easy enough to use an enum
instead. Something like:
enum CallerScope {
case Caller;
case Global;
}
function isReadable(string|CallerScope $scope = CallerScope::Caller, ?object $objecg = null) { ... }
Caller would still do the same stack inspection, but it makes the type more tightly
controlled and eliminates a nullable.
> As for the magic method logic: I would suggest to ignore the presence of
> __get() and __set(). This more closely aligns with the direction PHP
> goes towards and is also easy to work around by checking with
> method_exists() whether any such a method exists - the reverse is not
> true.
thumbs-up.gif
--Larry Garfield
Thread (4 messages)