Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:124400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------zPyGM4CX0fMD8CNJfEOTOCwh"
Message-ID: <132b86de-f571-4611-8b9b-35ae107901f0@scriptfusion.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 01:14:20 +0100
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Static class
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <eb3f59cc-3ed8-461a-a3a4-f6ba10ed31e1@scriptfusion.com>
 <ef0c3617-6757-45a1-a485-3f7c197fd599@app.fastmail.com>
 <4596aa73-cfd4-2292-7191-2839a5bab695@php.net>
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <4596aa73-cfd4-2292-7191-2839a5bab695@php.net>
From: bilge@scriptfusion.com (Bilge)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------zPyGM4CX0fMD8CNJfEOTOCwh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 25/06/2024 16:17, Derick Rethans wrote:
> we shouldn't be encouraging static classes as a bag of static functions, that ought to be just namespaced functions.
>
> cheers,
> Derick

Can someone clue me in as to why grouping related functions in a file 
with nothing but a namespace is strictly better than those same related 
functions grouped as members of a class? It doesn't have to be Larry or 
Derick, because even though they have expressed this view, I am aware 
they are not the only ones whom hold it. Anyone who can shed some light 
on this perspective is welcome to comment.

Cheers,
Bilge

--------------zPyGM4CX0fMD8CNJfEOTOCwh
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 25/06/2024 16:17, Derick Rethans
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:4596aa73-cfd4-2292-7191-2839a5bab695@php.net">
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""><span
      style="white-space: pre-wrap">we shouldn't be encouraging static classes as </span>a bag of static functions, that ought to be just namespaced functions.

cheers,
Derick
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p>Can someone clue me in as to why grouping related functions in a
      file with nothing but a namespace is strictly better than those
      same related functions grouped as members of a class? It doesn't
      have to be Larry or Derick, because even though they have
      expressed this view, I am aware they are not the only ones whom
      hold it. Anyone who can shed some light on this perspective is
      welcome to comment.</p>
    <p>Cheers,<br>
      Bilge<br>
    </p>
  </body>
</html>

--------------zPyGM4CX0fMD8CNJfEOTOCwh--