Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:52401
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain schlueters.de from 217.114.211.66 cause and error)
To: Andrew Curioso <andrewcurioso@gmail.com>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimkMTitkMkJ32B32cwYc_5qpLyRhA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimkMTitkMkJ32B32cwYc_5qpLyRhA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 20:32:00 +0200
Message-ID: <1305570720.1344.535.camel@guybrush>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Inconsistencies with constructors in SPL
From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=)

Hi,

I|d actuallz suggest a different option:

If a parent constructor is called but doesn't exist the engine should
ignore this. The same goes for destructors.

This solution would also work for userland classes.

johannes

On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 14:14 -0400, Andrew Curioso wrote:
> So, I ran across bug #54631
> 
> A fatal error is thrown if you try to call parent::__construct() from a
> subclass
> of SplObjectStorage.
> 
> I was going to close it as "expected behavior" since that is pretty normal
> if the parent class doesn't implement __construct().
> Also, the docs don't list it as having a __construct() method.
> 
> But then look at SplDoublyLinkedList (and a bunch of others). They are
> documented
> as having a __construct() method, yet it triggers a fatal error when you try
> to call
> "parent::__construct()" from a subclass' constructor .
> 
> So it seems to me that there are two possible solutions:
> 
> - Update the docs to remove ::__construct() for classes that don't have one.
> - Make sure __construct() is implemented in all SPL classes * and update the
> docs.
> 
> * Even if it is empty.
> 
> What's everyone thinking?
> 
> I'd be more than happy to add the constructors to the code where needed, I
> just
> want to make sure that it is the right move first.
> 
> 
> - Andrew