Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:18469 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 35855 invoked by uid 1010); 26 Aug 2005 09:55:58 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 35839 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2005 09:55:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Aug 2005 09:55:58 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.94.239.5 jdi.jdi-ict.nl Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from ([82.94.239.5:57497] helo=jdi.jdi-ict.nl) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 17/23-28235-D27EE034 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2005 05:55:57 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jdi.jdi-ict.nl (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j7Q9tofC003164; Fri, 26 Aug 2005 11:55:50 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jdi.jdi-ict.nl (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j7Q9tfqM003146; Fri, 26 Aug 2005 11:55:43 +0200 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 11:55:41 +0200 (CEST) X-X-Sender: derick@localhost To: Andi Gutmans cc: Frederik Holljen , PHP Developers Mailing List In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20050825182507.064da170@localhost> Message-ID: References: <430DBD80.6090804@cschneid.com> <430DC0DC.4060506@emini.dk> <6.2.3.4.2.20050825182507.064da170@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at jdi-ict.nl Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Property Overloading RFC From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans) On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Andi Gutmans wrote: > At 06:00 AM 8/25/2005, Edin Kadribasic wrote: > >Derick Rethans wrote: > > > And how can you possibly argue that this more complex than all the other > > > OO crap that people are suggesting here.... > > > >I belive that we should do our best to filter out this storm of OO > >feature requests. People want to make PHP look like some other OO > >languages for no good reason other that they're familiar with it or that > >their CS teacher thought they were cool. > > I completely agree. > This very much bloats the language syntax and would be mainly there for the > sake of OO fanatics. Guys, seriously, this kind of stuff and a lot of the > other OO proposals I've heard here lately are going to lead to PHP going down > the drain. Derick, the fact that you say it's not worse than "other OO crap > that people are suggesting here...." just means that it's also good to leave > the other crap out of PHP. I'm just arguing that the current way that setters and getters are implemented is broken. Instead of keeping a broken behavior I would like to see it fixed. > I don't see why the __get/__set/__isset/__unset methods themselves can't check > if the property exists and throw an exception if it doesn't. It has more to do with problems with encapsulation and visibility. Frederik made a nice summary of that, he will reply here: Derick -- Derick Rethans http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.no | http://xdebug.org