OK
I've got a machine set up with PHP5.4 and left the strict errors showing, and
I'm falling at the first hurdle :)
The functions for generating URL's are used both statically and as part of the
class. STRICT complains because they are not marked 'static' ( and I'm assuming
'public static'
On 15 Apr 2012, at 11:44, Lester Caine wrote:
I've got a machine set up with PHP5.4 and left the strict errors showing, and
I'm falling at the first hurdle :)
The functions for generating URL's are used both statically and as part of
the class. STRICT complains because they are not marked
Stuart Dallas wrote:
On 15 Apr 2012, at 11:44, Lester Caine wrote:
I've got a machine set up with PHP5.4 and left the strict errors showing, and
I'm falling at the first hurdle :)
The functions for generating URL's are used both statically and as part of the
class. STRICT complains because
On 15 Apr 2012, at 13:30, Lester Caine wrote:
Stuart Dallas wrote:
On 15 Apr 2012, at 11:44, Lester Caine wrote:
I've got a machine set up with PHP5.4 and left the strict errors showing,
and I'm falling at the first hurdle :)
The functions for generating URL's are used both statically
Stuart Dallas wrote:
No code duplication but clear separation between static and instantiated usage.
However, this is not the best way to structure this code IMO. The better option
would be to extract the static parts into a separate class, and use that new
class from the instantiated
On 15 Apr 2012, at 15:02, Lester Caine wrote:
Stuart Dallas wrote:
No code duplication but clear separation between static and instantiated
usage. However, this is not the best way to structure this code IMO. The
better option would be to extract the static parts into a separate class,
Stuart Dallas wrote:
Stuart Dallas wrote:
No code duplication but clear separation between static and instantiated
usage. However, this is not the best way to structure this code IMO. The better
option would be to extract the static parts into a separate class, and use that new
class from
On 15 Apr 2012, at 19:41, Lester Caine wrote:
Stuart Dallas wrote:
Stuart Dallas wrote:
No code duplication but clear separation between static and
instantiated usage. However, this is not the best way to structure this
code IMO. The better option would be to extract the static parts
8 matches
Mail list logo
