Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:23567
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <446C956B.6000802@vocalspace.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 10:40:27 -0500
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (Windows/20060308)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jeff Moore <jeff@procata.com>
Cc: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>, Jason Garber <jason@ionzoft.com>,
	Christian Schneider <cschneid@cschneid.com>, internals@lists.php.net
References: <785810036.20060511193536@ionzoft.com> <44647B7A.2070301@php.net> <932738738.20060513112734@marcus-boerger.de> <837405862.20060513223403@ionzoft.com> <36828701.20060514110529@marcus-boerger.de> <31269879.20060514221212@marcus-boerger.de> <1327845846.20060514222154@marcus-boerger.de> <1562034641.20060516203354@marcus-boerger.de> <7.0.1.0.2.20060516235201.090f10a8@zend.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20060516142654.02c78380@zend.com> <596643859.20060516233753@marcus-boerger.de> <7.0.1.0.2.20060516144030.039abe98@zend.com> <1531743211.20060516234945@marcus-boerger.de> <1014418169.20060516181322@ionzoft.com> <1677590447.20060517002135@marcus-boerger.de> <446A5B52.9060001@cschneid.com> <27079878.20060516191743@ionzoft.com> <446A601A.8010205@vocalspace.com> <f37b7981bd663f536ab158423df934a7@procata.com>
In-Reply-To: <f37b7981bd663f536ab158423df934a7@procata.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] private, protected, readonly, public
From: dante@vocalspace.com ("D. Dante Lorenso")

Jeff Moore wrote:
> On May 16, 2006, at 7:28 PM, D. Dante Lorenso wrote:
>> I'm not familiar with this OOP concept from any other language.  
>> Perhaps it exists, but if it doesn't, is there a reason why?
> Its hard to find a major OO language that does not have 
> property/accessor method support.

It's not the p, p, p, __get or __set I was unfamiliar with.  It's the 
'readonly' construct that I had not seen in any other language.

> The Pandora's box of complexity was opened when PHP got __get and 
> __set.  readonly or readable is just a bandaid that fixes one use case 
> of one problem, but does it in a way that doesn't help fix any of the 
> other problems in the future. There is nothing wrong with simple 
> properties in PHP just the way they are now.  There is also nothing 
> wrong with __get or __set.  They work well when you truly need virtual 
> properties, such as for an active record or a proxy class.

Sounds like you are against adding 'readonly'.

> What PHP is missing is a way to associate individual accessor methods 
> with individual properties ...

Isn't that what you do when you define the class without using __get and 
__set?

    class A { private $x; public $y; protected $z; function x() { return 
$this->x; } ... }
    $A = new A();

To associate an 'accessor method' with a property other than using the 
$A->x syntax, you just put () at the end of the call as in: $a->x() and 
now you have a method call.  Seems like we don't need anything new in 
the language for that.

I thought this thread was about wanting to create some new hybrid 
visibility/access level other than p/full, p/full, and p/full.  
Something along the lines of declaring different levels of access to 
variables based on visibility such that:

    * public readable, but also protected readable/writable
    * protected readable, but also private readable/writable

Although that sounds like fun, I'm all about duplicating what other 
languages have and find useful than inventing new oop concepts for the 
fun of academic exercise.

Dante