Alex Black wrote:
class foo aggregates bar {
}
I think that is a nice solution.
It's not, because it's static. Multiple iheritance is flawed, because
it's static.
Have a look at my RfC for delegation:
RfC: http://cvs.php.net/co.php/ZendEngine2/RFCs/004.txt
Further reading:
Stig S. Bakken wrote:
1. Interfaces / multiple inheritance
[snip]
I totally agree that those two don't belong into PHP.
class foo aggregates bar {
}
Please see my other reply (RfC on Delegation).
--
Sebastian Bergmann
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/
At 10:19 AM 6/11/2002, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
Alex Black wrote:
class foo aggregates bar {
}
I think that is a nice solution.
It's not, because it's static. Multiple iheritance is flawed, because
it's static.
That's hardly considered a flaw almost anywhere, even in the studies
Zeev Suraski wrote:
able to switch aggregated objects after instantiation is not very
helpful IMHO.
Strategy Design Pattern
?php
class aStrategy {
// ...
}
class anotherStrategy {
// ...
}
class Foo {
delegatee $strategy;
At 11:23 AM 6/11/2002, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
This way, an object of Foo can dynamically change behaviour in a very
elegant way.
I'm well aware of the strategy design pattern, but it existed before 'Lava'
(I use it in Java all the time)... You can just as easily do this by
creating a
Hi,
I have promised myself to not get into this discussion for a week now,
but the smell of dead horse overwhelmed me, so here goes...
I am guilty of a lot of OO use in PHP related to PEAR, I think OO is a
good thing when used right, but if not.. well, as Ken said at LinuxTag,
here, have some
Hi,
I have promised myself to not get into this discussion for a week now,
but the smell of dead horse overwhelmed me, so here goes...
heh.
class foo aggregates bar {
}
I think that is a nice solution.
2. Optional strong typing
When people say that being able to do
function
At 05:02 AM 6/8/2002 +0100, Michael Dransfield wrote:
At 02:40 08/06/2002 +0100, you wrote:
There are two reasons we repeat the 'PHP is not Java mantra':
(a) Many of those requesting these changes actually DO want to see PHP
as a Java with PHPish syntax.
Anyone wanting PHP to be a
From: Ilker Cetinkaya [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[snip]
but after getting known of the ze2 features, I personally saw PHP finally
growing out of that PHP, language for kiddies-image.
IMHO PHP is a real good language for its target purpose, but it has
potential to be much better.
PHP is a
--- Preston L. Bannister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Ilker Cetinkaya [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[snip]
but after getting known of the ze2 features, I personally saw PHP finally
growing out of that PHP, language for kiddies-image.
IMHO PHP is a real good language for its target
OO IS OO... JUST BECAUSE JAVA IS OO DOESN'T MEAN WE ARE SUGGESTING MAKING
JAVA
AGAIN. WE ARE SUGGESTING MORE OO FEATURES. Please Pleas Please realize the
difference. Im sick of people associating oo features as java features!
Making php more like java would be suggesting making a public
There are two reasons we repeat the 'PHP is not Java mantra':
(a) Many of those requesting these changes actually DO want to see PHP as a
Java with PHPish syntax.
(b) Java is (so far) the best implemented OO language out there that's
actually being used. It symbolizes the extreme OO world, if
There are two reasons we repeat the 'PHP is not Java mantra':
(a) Many of those requesting these changes actually DO want to see PHP
as a Java with PHPish syntax.
Anyone wanting PHP to be a simple or more flexable Java is barking up
the wrong tree... in fact all of the people I know who Im
eg: simple db-based shopping cart web site? use PHP... complex internet
backing system? use Java. Easy!
Use PHP! Easier.
Look, I've built hideously complex things with PHP - commerce systems that
do stream encryption on a per-field basis, complex interconnected process
stuff, large APIs,
Dan Hardiker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless Im missing the mark - for which I appologise. The PHP Group as a
whole seems to have mixed feelings on this issue - could there be some
form of concensus so that I (and many others on this list) can work out if
the requested extra functionality is
At 02:40 08/06/2002 +0100, you wrote:
There are two reasons we repeat the 'PHP is not Java mantra':
(a) Many of those requesting these changes actually DO want to see PHP
as a Java with PHPish syntax.
Anyone wanting PHP to be a simple or more flexable Java is barking up
the wrong
16 matches
Mail list logo
