> -----Original Message----- > From: Stan Vassilev [mailto:sv_for...@fmethod.com] > Sent: 19 September 2009 11:33 > To: troels knak-nielsen; Ford, Mike > Cc: internals@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] reference caller object > > >I, for one, am quite happy that it's fairly complicated and > convoluted > >to get the caller of a method, since it could lead to some > seriously > >incomprehensible code in the hands of someone who don't know > what they > >are doing. Requiring the user to use the backtrace is a > clear warning > >sign, and I think that's a good thing. > > > What is the basis for all this. When someone says a feature > is "ugly" and it leading to "seriously incomprehensible > code", I'd really like this is explained and supported by > evidence somehow, than just thrown around without facts. > > Most OOP languages expose the caller in some fashion. You'll > be hard at work to see in which of them it led to masses of > convoluted code. >
It is considered a code smell, using instanceof in conditionals. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?InstanceofInConditionals And should be refactored with... http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ReplaceConditionalWithPolymorphism Jared -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
