Gavin, Thanks for the updated documentation. I gotta say, though, that offsetSet(), offsetGet(), and offsetExists() aren't nearly as intuitive and easy to remember as the standard set(), get(), and has() methods of a container object. FWIW, I think they're poorly named in the SPL class to begin with. For a registry, it seems to me that those names reflect an implementation detail not inherent in the nature of the class.
If necessary, I can subclass--just seems like a lot of people in my situation might be wondering the same thing. Thanks! -Matt > Thanks Matthew for raising this issue. I've made a couple changes, and > improved the documentation: > > http://framework.zend.com/wiki/x/Wy8 > http://framework.zend.com/wiki/pages/pageinfo.action?pageId=12124 > > I believe the new code examples show how to pass around a registry > object explicitly, > and then set, get, and test for membership. As always, I am grateful > for your attention > to detail, since it helps us all create a more professional framework :) > > Also the new Zend::initRegistry() method enables developers to subclass > Zend_Registry, > and add alias methods for offsetGet() and offsetExists(), such as has(), > get(), set(), etc., > by creating an instance of the subclass in bootstrap code, and then > supplying that instance > to initRegistry(), before any other registry-related methods are used. > > Cheers, > Gavin > > Matthew Ratzloff wrote: >> Was it an oversight that Zend_Registry lost its set() and has() methods >> when it was refactored to extend ArrayObject, despite still having a >> corresponding get() method? I don't know about everyone else, but I >> prefer to pass around a registry object explicitly rather than rely on >> the >> static Zend::register()/isRegistered() methods. I would really like >> these >> methods back. >> >> I've filed an issue here: >> http://framework.zend.com/issues/browse/ZF-672 >> >> Thanks, >> >> -Matt
