Maybe magic implementation was a better idea for [] overrieding like
for __get, __set, __isset and __unset stuff. For example __offsetGet,
__offsetSet, __offsetUnset and __offsetExists (or __offsetIsset). This
way people will be free using return by ref or not and also may
implement only some of the methods, e.g. only __offsetGet.

On 25/11/05, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Oliver,
>
>   feel free to write an interface that supports return by reference and be
> done.
>
>   Having ArrayAccess in use we had to chose one of two possibilities. First
> go with return by reference and second go with return by copy. We chose
> return by copy simply because that was the intended use anyway. That it was
> possible to add return by reference to its signature was an error in the
> first place. Actually one that we mentioned very early. But this is again
> ignorance and maybe not writing every tiny piece of change n some document
> that nobody reads anyway. And oh it is in th NEWS file.
>
> marcus
>
> Friday, November 25, 2005, 8:47:44 PM, you wrote:
>
> > Sara Golemon schrieb:
> >> ArrayAccess interface for the dimension read/write.
>
> > Just to bring the issue up agaian: The current ArrayAccess
> > implementation does not allow for proper simulation of arrays. This has
> > been "broken by fixing" (tm) the method prototypes not to allow "&"
> > anymore in interface implementations where the interface doesn't specify
> > a "&" for the corresponding method and at the same time not changing
> > ArrayAccess to feature a "&" for offsetGet.
>
> =>> You can't do
>
> > $ArrayAccesImplementingObject['virtual offset'][]='test';
>
> > for offsets that are arrays.
>
> > OLLi
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>  Marcus
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to