On 05/03/2016 23:15, Davey Shafik wrote:
You are mid-reading, none of the classes in my examples extend the
others, they are all just using the same trait in different ways.
- Class a: use the trait with no aliases. Result: as expected
- Class b: use the trait with a simple alias, no
On 03/04/2016 01:17 AM, Davey Shafik wrote:
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Stephen Coakley
wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 09:25:50 -0500, Kevin Gessner wrote:
Hello internals team! I'd like to propose an RFC to allow traits to
implement interfaces.
I've noticed s
Your class 'c' example (last link) only shows method 'bar' (the trait
method) and not 'bat' (the aliased metod). The class has both, but 'bat' is
hidden from get_class_methods() because it is private.
On 6 Mar 2016 10:16 am, "Davey Shafik" wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:06 AM,
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:06 AM, Rowan Collins
wrote:
> Davey Shafik wrote on 04/03/2016 07:17:
>
>> 1. If you simply alias (use foo { bar as bat; }) then you end up with an
>> *additional* method with the new name, the trait method as defined is
>> still
>> brought in,
Davey Shafik wrote on 04/03/2016 07:17:
1. If you simply alias (use foo { bar as bat; }) then you end up with an
*additional* method with the new name, the trait method as defined is still
brought in, and_will_ override inherited methods of the same name.
Here's a clearer example of this:
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Stephen Coakley
wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 09:25:50 -0500, Kevin Gessner wrote:
>
> > Hello internals team! I'd like to propose an RFC to allow traits to
> > implement interfaces.
> >
> > I've noticed s pattern in Etsy's code and
On 24 February 2016 at 22:04, Chase Peeler wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:46 PM Kevin Gessner wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Chris Riley wrote:
>>
>> > This isn't such a great idea as it will cause some of
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:46 PM Kevin Gessner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Chris Riley wrote:
>
> > This isn't such a great idea as it will cause some of traits
> functionality
> > to be broken: I can currently use a trait and alias its
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Chris Riley wrote:
> This isn't such a great idea as it will cause some of traits functionality
> to be broken: I can currently use a trait and alias its methods and change
> their visibility. If a trait implements an interface which is
On 23 February 2016 at 00:37, Alex Bowers wrote:
> Would a fair solution to this be having the using class define whether to
> inherit the implementations? Perhaps a new keyword akin to 'propagated', so
> the code will read
>
> Class Foo {
>Use propagated TraitName;
> }
Would a fair solution to this be having the using class define whether to
inherit the implementations? Perhaps a new keyword akin to 'propagated', so
the code will read
Class Foo {
Use propagated TraitName;
}
Only then will the implementations from that trait bubble through. If it
isn't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
First off: I like the idea of a trait being able to implement an
interface and having PHP validating that because I am like Larry and
prefer language construct over comments.
On 2/18/2016 4:11 PM, Chase Peeler wrote:
>
> I agree, in theory, but I
Hi Chase and Larry,
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Chase Peeler
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:35 AM Larry Garfield
> wrote:
> I'd rather the class
> > still need to self-declare the interface; that it uses a trait to
> > fulfill that
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:35 AM Larry Garfield
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 01:05 PM, Kevin Gessner wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Kevin Gessner
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello internals team! I'd like to propose an RFC to allow traits to
>
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016, at 01:05 PM, Kevin Gessner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Kevin Gessner wrote:
>
> > Hello internals team! I'd like to propose an RFC to allow traits to
> > implement interfaces.
> >
>
> I've created a proper RFC wiki page here with the
15 matches
Mail list logo