Why final? about psr7 HOT 3 CLOSED

Thing is, you can't always use decoration to change behaviour in a meaningful way, without re-implementing. In a perfect world, that would be great. But we don't write perfect code, and therefore I feel it is unfair to prevent users from adapting code to their needs. Also, and this is my opinion, making things explicitly final violates OCP.

from psr7.

You should use decorators instead of extending the classes:

https://github.com/getgrav/grav/tree/develop/system/src/Grav/Framework/Psr7/Traits
https://github.com/getgrav/grav/tree/develop/system/src/Grav/Framework/Psr7 (ignore AbstractUri, it's deprecated)

from psr7.

These are excellent questions. This has been discussed in lengths at #31.

I know that this library is forcing people to write good code and not to be lazy. I know that it is frustrating. I have not yet seen an argument based on computer science that show that the classes should not be final.

Also, and this is my opinion, making things explicitly final violates OCP.

I see that this is your opinion. But that opinion has no support in the definition of polymorphic open-closed principle. =)

You have to consider the "module" to be the PSR-7 specification together with this implementation.

from psr7.