At 16:46 07.06.2002, Joseph Tate wrote:
>How much of C has been reused, and reused and reused again? There is no oo
>in stdlib.
Ah come on there is no oo in c.
You should have asked for C++ and STL (and that is very much of code reuse
even though its pro is its main foe: it is so much of reuse t
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 09:27:13AM -0500, Jason T. Greene wrote:
>> IMO, one of the big reasons for having a powerful OO mode, and
>> continually evolving php to have a bigger target than just "a web
>> programming language", is code re-usability.
>
> You do not need OO for this. OO just helps y
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 09:27:13AM -0500, Jason T. Greene wrote:
> IMO, one of the big reasons for having a powerful OO mode, and
> continually evolving php to have a bigger target than just "a web
> programming language", is code re-usability.
You do not need OO for this. OO just helps you to ma
At 06:14 PM 6/7/2002, Jason T. Greene wrote:
>True, I hear it is even possible to reuse code in COBOL : )
>
>I believe that the ease of maintenance depends purely on the language.
>i.e. using a strictly procedural language for a large framework can be
>quite messy. Have you ever seen large librari
At 05:46 PM 6/7/2002, Joseph Tate wrote:
>How much of C has been reused, and reused and reused again? There is no oo
>in stdlib.
Exactly. C is one of the easiest languages for code reuse, but it totally
depends on your programming habits and skill. As a matter of fact, I find
Java to be one
How much of C has been reused, and reused and reused again? There is no oo
in stdlib.
> -Original Message-
> Code reusability is a psychological issue. You can reuse code in PHP 4,
> and it'll be even better in 5 - PEAR is a clear demonstration of
> this. Whether people actually end up
Code reusability is a psychological issue. You can reuse code in PHP 4,
and it'll be even better in 5 - PEAR is a clear demonstration of
this. Whether people actually end up reusing code depends on the way they
code, very little does it depend on the language.
Zeev
At 05:27 PM 6/7/2002, Jas
--- Dan Hardiker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am Donnerstag, 6. Juni 2002 19:59 schrieb Dan Hardiker:
> >> I sit in many PHP channels (IRC), and observe many class-based
> >> PHP networks (php-classes.org is one I monitor closely) and
> >> can say definatly that the majority of PHP users wan
> Am Donnerstag, 6. Juni 2002 19:59 schrieb Dan Hardiker:
>> I sit in many PHP channels (IRC), and observe many class-based
>> PHP networks (php-classes.org is one I monitor closely) and
>> can say definatly that the majority of PHP users want *more*
>> OO capabilities in PHP.
[..]
> So when user
Am Donnerstag, 6. Juni 2002 19:59 schrieb Dan Hardiker:
> I sit in many PHP channels (IRC), and observe many class-based
> PHP networks (php-classes.org is one I monitor closely) and
> can say definatly that the majority of PHP users want *more*
> OO capabilities in PHP.
From a marketing POV, wh
Aggregation sometimes involves delegation. The 'parent' object delegates
requests to the right aggregated objects (in other cases, the 'parent'
object returns its aggregated objects and you use them directly).
Zeev
At 10:43 PM 6/6/2002, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
>Andi Gutmans wrote:
> > The t
Andi Gutmans wrote:
> The talk was about aggregation of instances of classes with auto-proxy.
I think that's called delegation, not aggregation. Have a look at what
the JavaLab guys at my University are doing under the term
"delegation":
http://javalab.cs.uni-bonn.de/research/darwin/
Andi,
Before you go ahead with this I would like to discuss it some more too. I'm
wondering if we can fully support MI but i don't want to start this
conversation now.
btw: i like the contains better than aggergates.
- brad
--- Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A couple of months ag
A couple of months ago it was agreed on how to get multiple inheritance
like behavior in a way which could work with PHP. I just haven't had time
to implement it yet.
The talk was about aggregation of instances of classes with auto-proxy.
So you'd do something like:
class foo extends bar contain
> I believe the OO level we have in ZE2 is the upper limit
> of what a scripting language should have. There's no doubt in my mind
> that going beyond that is going to complicate the language beyond what
> our average users want.
I would have to disagree to this statement extremly. It would n
15 matches
Mail list logo
