On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 22:23:41 -0700, Dmitriy Sintsov <ques...@rambler.ru>
wrote:
4 Апрель 2013 г. 9:16:49 пользователь Jeroen De Dauw
(jeroended...@gmail.com) написал:
Hey,
> I see no reason to get rid of the hooks class.
Given you also do not understand why I think the comment is funny, I
recommend you read up on why writing static code is harmful. And on how
global state can hide in static "classes".
> We use static classes other places in core.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon
In almost all such cases I have seen in core this kind of use of static
is
bad.
> And there's no reason to revert to hideous functions like we had
before.
No one is suggesting that.
Cheers
--
Why the hooks should not be static? Multi-site (farm) built-in support
in core without $wgConf? Common page table across multiple sites?
Dmitriy
How do you envision non-static hooks working and supporting multiple wikis?
--
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/]
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
