"I know the right way to use this code and I have thought of all the possible use cases. If you don’t agree, then you have to prove me wrong and wait until I ei

"I know the right way to use this code and I have thought of all the possible use cases. If you don’t agree, then you have to prove me wrong and wait until I either agree or figure out a better right way for you. This is the real message developers hear when internal code is private scope or marked with the final keyword – a message that they have arbitrarily limited power and ability to make changes where they need to. But it doesn’t stop there." Maybe I'm missing something, but I kind of agree with the (italicized) straw man argument the article is trying to refute. My private implementation details should be irrelevant if I give you a public API, and it's likely that I have thought it through enough to tell what'll be useful. Furthermore I can change the implementation without breaking you. If you need to muck around with the private implementation details, there's something missing from the public API. What happens if the original author wants to change the implementation later? Hiding the implementation details just seems like reasonable encapsulation to me. Is there something specific to the PHP world which places less emphasis on this than I'm accustomed to?