Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:35791
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain stefan-marr.de from 82.96.83.42 cause and error)
Message-ID: <47C2D8C5.2000401@stefan-marr.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:03:33 +0100
Reply-To: php@stefan-marr.de
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net>
Cc: Lukas Kahwe Smith <mls@pooteeweet.org>,
	Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com>, internals@lists.php.net
References: <001c01c87264$3c01b4e0$b4051ea0$@de> <698DE66518E7CA45812BD18E807866CE014A8D9D@us-ex1.zend.net> <A8D5F2E2-AAD0-45A7-8BFA-0A95DF42E514@pooteeweet.org> <342791187.20080225104951@marcus-boerger.de>
In-Reply-To: <342791187.20080225104951@marcus-boerger.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Traits for PHP
From: php@stefan-marr.de (Stefan Marr)

Hi,

Marcus Boerger schrieb:
> Trait a {
>   function f() {}
> }
> 
> Trait b {
>   function f() {}
> }
> 
> class c {
>   uses a, b;
>   function f() {}
> }
> 
> Reflection(c):
> function "\0a\0f"   function a::f
> function "\0b\0f"   function b::f
> function "f"        function f
> 
> All nicely callable using array syntax:
> class d extends c {
>    function t() {
>      call_user_func(array($this, "a::f")):
>      call_user_func(array($this, "b::f")):
>      call_user_func(array($this, "f")):
>    }
> }
> $o = new c:
> $o->test();
May be I don't get the point completly, but having this, every thing 
what traits are trying to solve is lost... IMHO
Instead, you are playing with the devil (C++ multiple-inheritance).

The main part of the trait idea is to be able to solve conflicts 
explicitly. Think this is the major contribution of traits and the 
things being discussed here right now are not THIS kind of traits anymore.

Your other mail from today goes in the same direction. I don't feel 
comfortable with this :(

I will put together some thoughts on how we could build real traits 
semantics with the intended benefits you might be a bit more comfortable 
with.

But I absolutely think the proposals from the last days are going in the 
wrong direction. Instead of abusing the traits idea for this, it would 
be a valuable contribution to make a cut and drop the traits ideas for 
the sake of simplicity and use some mixin mechanism instead.

I'll try to have a better "real trait thing" ready in this evening.

Kind Regards
Stefan