php.net |  support |  documentation |  report a bug |  advanced search |  search howto |  statistics |  random bug |  login

go to bug id or search bugs for

Request #75263 function __construct(): void
Submitted: 2017-09-26 20:38 UTC Modified: 2017-09-27 05:22 UTC
From: saymongcsw at gmail dot com Assigned:
Status: Not a bug Package: Class/Object related
PHP Version: 7.1.10RC1 OS: any
Private report: No CVE-ID: None
View Developer Edit
Welcome back! If you're the original bug submitter, here's where you can edit the bug or add additional notes.
If you forgot your password, you can retrieve your password here.
Password:
Status:
Package:
Bug Type:
Summary:
From: saymongcsw at gmail dot com
New email:
PHP Version: OS:

 

 [2017-09-26 20:38 UTC] saymongcsw at gmail dot com 
Description:
------------
Can't declare VOID return type in constructor. (ex. https://3v4l.org/9slJl)

Test script:
---------------
<?php

class Say
{
    public function __construct(): void
    {
    }

    public function hello(): string
    {
        return 'Hello';
    }
}

echo (new Say)->hello();

Expected result:
----------------
Hello

Actual result:
--------------
Fatal error: Constructor Say::__construct() cannot declare a return type in %s on line 3

Patches

Pull Requests

History

AllCommentsChangesGit/SVN commitsRelated reports
 [2017-09-26 21:29 UTC] spam2 at rhsoft dot net 
why do you think a void retunr-type would be correct for __construct()

$x = new my_class(1, 2)
call __construct(1, 2) of my_class and returns a object instance
 [2017-09-26 21:48 UTC] saymongcsw at gmail dot com 
I mean add possibility for :void in constructor without behavior change.
Constructor would be good for configure object but without constructors in PHP works too... (https://3v4l.org/QnvEi)
also see link in comment above that show in hhvm-3.21.0 works as expected.
 [2017-09-26 22:54 UTC] spam2 at rhsoft dot net 
but to gain what?

it's a magic function with special behavior anyways (see new my_class(1, 2) which calls __constrcut without naming it)
 [2017-09-27 05:22 UTC] requinix@php.net
-Status: Open +Status: Not a bug
 [2017-09-27 05:22 UTC] requinix@php.net 
Constructors in object-oriented languages do not have return types.
 [2018-01-03 16:45 UTC] Andy_Schmidt at HM-Software dot com 
Since the constructor must use 

   return 'somevalue'; 

to return a value, I consequently do believe that declaring:

   function __construct(): void { ... }

would actually be the proper way to document that restriction - now that "void" is a valid function return type?
 [2019-06-26 05:10 UTC] elliseprod at gmail dot com 
Actually, watch the PHP doc : https://www.php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.decon.php

__construct ([ mixed $args = "" [, $... ]] ) : void

So, I agree with having the opportunity to declare VOID return type in constructor
 [2021-04-20 10:39 UTC] somemail at gmail dot com 
What is the point of throwing a fatal error when declaring the correct void return type for __construct() and __destruct() and __clone() ?
Those functions do not return a data type, but they DO return to the place from where they have been called, don't they?

And if a fatal error should be throwed, then why isn't there a fatal error for other magic methods, like __unserialize() and __wakeup() ?
 
PHP Copyright © 2001-2024 The PHP Group
All rights reserved. 		Last updated: Sun Dec 22 11:01:30 2024 UTC