Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49882
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.170 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        b=E/qJaPABqzB+vA3guBoKI+v8aWLWuniGBdKT/vq+fzQZEfLPy46aFUQ8VvuOErUPzo
         w1xK0ePA1Rgfiz8JMutlLv8IXfwe/yc5IRUNntaOkRfPq5tJfQnb3tTUq3ntvW7E91C0
         PljcQ+OxzMW+qvwx6vBvrryWxeY+FocIVVt5Q=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: tyra3l@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTink__JoHanZ1zHpawgrJkZ1JAQ7Gv2=AZce0MWP@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTink__JoHanZ1zHpawgrJkZ1JAQ7Gv2=AZce0MWP@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 09:24:56 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTin17M=G8Mw6Wz=r89LLqAYRYx6PL08==TbLWeJ6@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nathan Nobbe <quickshiftin@gmail.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e68f9dae9c6b8b049201ca96
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Using child classes/interfaces as desired type hints
From: info@tyrael.hu (Ferenc Kovacs)

--0016e68f9dae9c6b8b049201ca96
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Nathan Nobbe <quickshiftin@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Probly rehashing an old conversation here, but I'm wondering why the
> following isn't supported
>
> <?php
> abstract class AbstractServer {}
> class ConcreteServer extends AbstractServer {}
>
> abstract class AbstractClient {
>  abstract function doStuff(AbstractServer $o);
> }
>
> class ConcreteClient extends AbstractClient {
>  function doStuff(ConcreteServer $o) {}
> }
> ?>
>
> This results in a fatal
> Fatal error: Declaration of ConcreteClient::doStuff() must be compatible
> with that of AbstractClient::doStuff() in
> /Users/quickshiftin/gitRepos/timberline/php-api-v15-client/testOverride.php
> on line 11
>
> I was reading a few posts from way back when
>
> http://marc.info/?t=107774904800001&r=1&w=2
>
> yet still find myself wondering.  I think it can be said here that if
> there's a contract defined by AbstractClient::doStuff, that same contract
> is
> honored by ConcreteClient::doStuff.  I also think changing the language to
> support this notion wouldn't raise BC issues for the most part (at all?)
> since at the moment you're forced to move to the lowest common denominator
> in the tree, in this case
>
> class ConcreteClient extends AbstractClient {
>  function doStuff(AbstractServer $o) {}
> }
>
> your feedback appreciated,
>
> -nathan
>


It was discussed recently:

http://marc.info/?l=php-internals&m=128220433328115&w=2

Tyrael

--0016e68f9dae9c6b8b049201ca96--