On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 9:04 PM, Nathan Rixham <nrix...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Eric Butera wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Nathan Rixham <nrix...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Kyle Terry wrote:
>>>
>>> and on the other side.. to open things up
>>>
>>> interface Object {
>>> }
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> abstract class Object {
>>> }
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> class Object {
>>> }
>>>
>>> nothing else for now:
>>>
>>> reason:
>>> to address the current and forseable lack of function(object $obj) in
>>> php;
>>> in addition to allow future scope for any common to all methods (or any
>>> implementation of this to have)
>>>
>>> i guess first is it a good idea to have any of the above and to address
>>> this, then next if so which?
>>>
>>
>> That needs to be prefixed. Or maybe namespaces if you're targeting
>> 5.3? It'd suck to have a lot of code using such a thing only to
>> become a reserved word.
>
> agreed, prefixed or namespaced (2 versions preference)
>
> thought now that should php introduce a superclass all others inherit, then
> "ours" should inherit it as well.. so non clashing name for sure.
>
> that's if we need one..? [imho +1 to one of the above]
>
>
Java has pojo's [1]. Maybe PHP can have popo's. :)
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POJO
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
