Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:40067
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.44.28 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references;
        b=XOFVYEaOmaVW/vqA8noFce6SPCi0cr3UpS9+PoO8fz61cfMEUp6fws9VY04YwpCuzW
         2kcyWQgoh6/DlbS2CVfy100TnORBVvvU7VqlT8+nSCLKIsvWVe+jlNfXMezYlR2HIZPS
         Mi4EXBYgPn/ZE9Hn0uVcviPBWG3xH5Fejw58g=
Message-ID: <7f3ed2c30808221132q77bd8cc8wa72d5f650317c987@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 20:32:42 +0200
To: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?David_Z=FClke?=" <david.zuelke@bitextender.com>
Cc: "George Antoniadis" <george@noodles.gr>, 
	"Lukas Kahwe Smith" <mls@pooteeweet.org>, 
	"Marcus Boerger" <helly@php.net>, "Timm Friebe" <thekid@thekid.de>, 
	internals@lists.php.net, 
	"=?ISO-8859-1?Q?\"Johannes_Schl=FCter\"?=" <johannes@php.net>
In-Reply-To: <9679889D-12D5-4970-B4D2-9DD5D2E7E1F4@bitextender.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <01d401c8fe5e$6bc9d730$16b2a8c0@kartofel>
	 <022101c8fe5f$4a3e3c40$16b2a8c0@kartofel>
	 <1901158190.20080815120657@marcus-boerger.de>
	 <7EB12BC1-41F1-458C-8017-9AB4D910CAA5@pooteeweet.org>
	 <641f88250808220508o3ddda411qf5c863d39212110e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <9679889D-12D5-4970-B4D2-9DD5D2E7E1F4@bitextender.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] __getStatic
From: hannes.magnusson@gmail.com ("Hannes Magnusson")

On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 15:06, David Z=FClke <david.zuelke@bitextender.com>=
 wrote:
> Am 22.08.2008 um 14:08 schrieb George Antoniadis:
>
>> I thought this had allready been denied, or am I wrong?
>> Also can new features still be implemented for 5.3? Isn't that closed?
>>
>> Don't get me wrong, I SO want this feature! :P
>
> The mail below explicitly states that both release managers have given th=
eir
> okay for implementing any missing __magicStatic() methods... read the mai=
l
> again!

Well... I actually thought this was rejected too until Marcus came out
of the blue and then Lukas giving the RMs blessing..

I can't find a single usecase for this, and see absolutely no point
with it and hardly consider this "making this [__call/__get/__isset
magic] complete". However, I could not care less of it gets in or not.

-Hannes