David Harkness wrote:
I've never used the old-style constructors, but perhaps the semantics of
parent:: changed and you need to instead use $this- as in
$this-Tag(option, $name);
That's a total guess. I don't have 5.2 handy to try it out, but both work in
5.3 using a simple example. Can
Nathan Nobbe wrote:
2. try modifying Tag SelectBoxOption to have __construct() instead of
Tag() SelectBoxOption(), then call parent::__construct() from inside
of SelectBoxOption::__construct(); see if that clears up your problem
under
5.2 (read: this will only be a partial solution as it
Nathan Nobbe wrote:
Why not test for the type of $name at each point of interest in the
SelectBoxOption
constructor? If you're passing a string value to the constructor it almost
has to be getting changed by the Tag constructor, right ?
class SelectBoxOption extends Tag {
function
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Kris Deugau kdeu...@vianet.ca wrote:
Nathan Nobbe wrote:
Why not test for the type of $name at each point of interest in the
SelectBoxOption
constructor? If you're passing a string value to the constructor it
almost
has to be getting changed by the Tag
It's acting as if Tag's constructor a) declares $name as a reference using
$name, and b) is assigning itself ($this) to $name for some (probably bad)
reason. That's the only way I can see that $name inside SelectBoxOption's
constructor could change from a string to an object.
A peek at Tag's
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Kris Deugau kdeu...@vianet.ca wrote:
Nathan Nobbe wrote:
Why not test for the type of $name at each point of interest in the
SelectBoxOption
constructor? If you're passing a string value to the constructor it
almost
has to be getting changed by the Tag
6 matches
Mail list logo
