Kilbride, James P. wrote: > I'm not going to comment on the rest of the stuff that was said, which > is why I snipped it. I'm not a purist when it comes to OO at all. But I > do have to say that while iterators in ruby are amazingly powerful that > leave me going wow.. that is so cool.. The thought of how they could be > abused and the thought of having to support that abuse in maintenance > mode gives me shivers of pure fear. And the fact that classes can very > easily be defined in half a dozen places means trying to figure out what > code does by finding a class and it's declarations can become a > nightmare.
you make very good points. it's tribute to php that code written in it is so transparent comparitively speaking. it might a little less nimble and a bit more verbose but when your debugging someone else's spaghetti that's a bonus :-) but taking away flexibility doesn't take away the ability to write monsterous, spaghetti OO - I'm quite sure I could write stuff like that whilst conforming to any/all purist rules you want to throw at me ;-) > > Of course no we get off into the ruby versus php war.. maybe I shouldn't > start this conversation at all... no war here, move along, these are not the droids your looking for. > >> don't get me started on iterators in ruby and how flexible it >> is in changing stuff (like method parameters - or like >> redefining a whole class at runtime). hmmm :-/ pity my ruby >> skills suck. :-P >> >>> Cheers, >>> Rob. >> -- >> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To >> unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> >> > -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
