Peter Lind wrote:
On 24 March 2010 15:33, Robert Cummings <rob...@interjinn.com> wrote:
Peter Lind wrote:
One of the main points of the OP was that you can document the code
properly. Your example doesn't allow for nice docblocks in any way, as
you'll either have to param points or a whole lot of noise.
I dunno, seems highly documentable to me. Each route is handled by it's own
method with the parameters being fully declared in the handler method's
signature.
Only problem is the OP wanted to be able to created objects with
variable amounts of arguments. I.e. passing just one argument to the
constructor wasn't an option, far as I could tell. That's why he was
looking at c++/c# overloading: creating a constructor for each
scenario because the amount and kind of arguments varied.
Which means that the docblock for your constructor will look something like
/**
* dynamic constructor
*
* @param int $constructor_type
* @param string|array|object|whatever_you_could_think_to_throw_at_it $something
* @param string|array|object|whatever_you_could_think_to_throw_at_it
$something this is optional
* @param etc
*
* @access public
* @return void
*/
Actually, I would write it more like the following:
> /**
> * dynamic constructor that delegates construction and parameters to a
> * registered alternate constructor. See specific constructors for
> * supported parameters.
> *
> * @param int $constructor_type
> * @param mixed $param,....
> *
> * @access public
> * @return void
> */
The ,... is a supported syntax. Then I'd add the appropriate docblock
for the alternate constructors.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
