On May 6, 2008, at 12:45 PM, Marcus Boerger wrote:
public $property {
__get = getProperty;
__set = setProperty;
}
string public function getProperty() {
return $this->_property;
}
string protected function setProperty(string $value) {}
Hi Marcus,
I prefer this approach.
One advantage is that it is compatible with existing classes that have
done the getXXX() style accessors already.
One thing That I am hoping to avoid, though, is the need to declare
these kinds of basic accessor methods at all. (the ones that do
nothing but set or read a backing property.) it seems like PHP should
be able to generate them, or just fallback into a simple property
access on the backing store, if that store is specified as part of the
property.
This should be the same as the previous example replacing setProperty
and getProperty with direct references to the backing store:
protected $_property;
public $property {
__get = $_property;
__set = $_property;
}
Or do we force people to always specify
get,set,isset und unset? Or should we only enforce get/set and have
isset
and unset emulated with them (isset()~>isset(get()),
unset()~>set(NULL))?
it would be nice to have exactly this emulation for __isset and
__unset when they are not declared.
However, leaving out the __set should make the property read only and
leaving out the __get should make the property write only (less
useful, but symmetric).
Following the C# convention for declaring properties in interfaces
would declare the previous as
interface bar {
public $property {__set; __get;}
}
Best Regards,
Jeff
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
