What I was hoping for is that when it was defined, that the value stored
would be a copy of the object at that point in time, and that whenever you
set a var to that constant you would get a new copy of what was defined.
I guess, then, I can set a variable to a reference of a constant too????
I'll have to work around it....
Medvitz
Stig S. Bakken wrote:
> Assigning an object to a constant is, IMHO, abuse of constants. What
> would you expect? An immutable object? You would probably be better
> off making a function to clone your object or something like that.
>
> - Stig
>
> On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 02:52, medvitz wrote:
>>
>> Should it be the same object, though???
>>
>> I thought that the whole concept of a 'constant' was that it, well, was
>> constant. Wouldn't it make more sense to auto-clone objects when they
>> are accessed through a constant????
>>
>> Medvitz
>>
>>
>> Zeev Suraski wrote:
>>
>> > It'll be the same object.
>> >
>> > At 17:33 14/04/2002, medvitz wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>This may have been addressed already but:
>> >>
>> >>If I have the following code:
>> >>
>> >>class Beer
>> >>{
>> >> ...
>> >>}
>> >>
>> >>$a = new Beer();
>> >>
>> >>define('BaseBeer', $a);
>> >>
>> >>$b = BaseBeer;
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Will $a & $b be the same object or will $b be a copy. (Under ZE2).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Thx.
>> >>
>> >>Medvitz
>> >>
>> >>--
>> >>PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
>> >>To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>
>> --
>> PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
