Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:21637
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060122185859.02b91f38@zend.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:00:25 -0800
To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>,internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <1179437188.20060122193218@marcus-boerger.de>
References: <1179437188.20060122193218@marcus-boerger.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Static vs. non static
From: andi@zend.com (Andi Gutmans)

Yes, this was by design. Via class it should be ::method() and via 
object it should be ->method().
Why do you think this is wrong? I think it actually makes a lot of 
sense and don't see what we gain from allowing to call 
self->method(). If there's a good reason, I'd be open to it though.
And please next time give people a chance to reply to your email, 
especially on a weekend, before commiting a patch. Why do you send an 
email if you don't want to hear an answer?

Andi

At 10:32 AM 1/22/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
>Hello internals,
>
>right now we allow 'class::method()' like syntax but not 'class->method()
>like. If noone comes up with a valid reason why i am forced to call
>a parents method using static syntax i'll commit the little required
>change. We could even add an E_STRICT when the old syntax is used where
>not applicable. But right now i don't see that message as neccessary
>unless people want to disallow misuse of the old synatx any time later.
>
>
>Best regards,
>  Marcus
>
>--
>PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php