Am I the only one thinking this, is there actually someone who is using
__construct as re-initialising method?
php doesn't invoke the parent's constructor from the subclass if the
subclass also have a constructor, so in that case calling
parent::__construct() manually is your only option
Authorities don't run away.
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Pascal Chevrel pascal.chev...@free.frwrote:
e 12/09/2013 07:40, Daniel Brown a écrit :
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Seva Lapsha seva.lap...@gmail.com
wrote:
PHP is a collective mind. Any dictatorship would mean
PHP is a collective mind. Any dictatorship would mean a degradation for it.
If you don't like how it's managed, there is an easy path:
1. Earn authority.
2. Propose a change.
3. Implement it.
4. Maintain it.
Start with 1.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Florin Patan florinpa...@gmail.com
Hi,
As I see it, adapters not only serve declaration purpose, they also can
adapt the method and param names and even alter or tune the execution flow.
Imagine this simple case:
You have a protocol Duck with method walk() with few concrete
implementations. Later you have another instance of
...
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Seva Lapsha seva.lap...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, I didn't propose to wrap any use of a property reference into a meta
object, in this case a certain distinguishable string format could
represent it with no extra handling.
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Rasmus
fully client-side UI...
(sorry if I'm going off on a tangent here - just sharing some of the
thoughts that lead me down this path to begin with...)
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Seva Lapsha seva.lap...@gmail.com wrote:
Good developers research and find *best* ways to use the available tools
The feature exists in Python:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/574730/python-how-to-ignore-an-exception-and-proceed,
in Ruby:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5089802/which-is-the-shortest-way-to-silently-ignore-a-ruby-exception.
Just saying.
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Patrick ALLAERT
Hi Rasmus,
I agree with you that strings are not the best way to refer to an element
sometimes. However, to me your Symfony2 example only demonstrates the flaw
of the component's design decision, not the limitation of the language.
Sometimes developers (not just Symfony, but other frameworks too)
and property-name, nothing else.
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Seva Lapsha seva.lap...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Rasmus,
I agree with you that strings are not the best way to refer to an element
sometimes. However, to me your Symfony2 example only demonstrates the flaw
of the component's design
, nothing else.
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Seva Lapsha seva.lap...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Rasmus,
I agree with you that strings are not the best way to refer to an element
sometimes. However, to me your Symfony2 example only demonstrates the flaw
of the component's design decision
Well, how about renaming the functions, create aliases for BC and throw
E_DEPRECATED or E_STRICT on their usage? And write a PEAR script bundled
with the distribution to migrate to the new convention?
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.comwrote:
Hi!
I've seen
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/25/2013 10:55 AM, Seva Lapsha wrote:
Well, how about renaming the functions, create aliases for BC and throw
E_DEPRECATED or E_STRICT on their usage? And write a PEAR script bundled
with the distribution
to determine the type it is cast to,
which is why the __toInt(), __toArray(), etc, so that the language can
request the type it needs to cast to.
-Original Message-
From: Seva Lapsha [mailto:seva.lap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 4:56 PM
To: internals@lists.php.net
Subject
Hi,
Not quite. The proposed is a syntactic sugar which is thought to handle any
transformation of a value, not necessarily or limited to type or class
conversion. It is of course possible to limit the usage to just that, with
any user defined convention or best practice. In fact it's pretty
-
From: Seva Lapsha [mailto:seva.lap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 6:18 AM
To: Clint Priest
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Custom Casting
Sorry, I comprehend neither the cause nor the effect in your argument
statement. Can you please elaborate?
On Sun, May
Thanks.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.comwrote:
Hi!
Not quite. The proposed is a syntactic sugar which is thought to handle
any transformation of a value, not necessarily or limited to type or
class conversion. It is of course possible to limit the
Please read my previous comment.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Clint Priest cpri...@zerocue.com wrote:
How would one use your Castable interface to cast a Class “Test” to any
of integer, array or boolean?
** **
*From:* Seva Lapsha [mailto:seva.lap...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Monday, May
/object_cast_to_types
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/class_casting_to_scalar
Thank you in advance,
Seva Lapsha
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki yohg...@ohgaki.net wrote:
Hi all,
I think my RFC confused people on this list due to improper descriptions
and too much information. Sorry for the confusion
-1
May harm code portability and maintainability, allows intended or accidental
fluctuations in code consistence.
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Tjerk Meesters tjerk.meest...@gmail.comwrote:
-1
The nuisance of updating IDE, search tools etc doesn't outweigh typing 9
characters less imho.
19 matches
Mail list logo
