Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:54372
Return-Path: <lars.schultz@toolpark.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 53222 invoked from network); 4 Aug 2011 16:50:06 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 4 Aug 2011 16:50:06 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lars.schultz@toolpark.com; sender-id=unknown
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lars.schultz@toolpark.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain toolpark.com from 195.49.42.12 cause and error)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lars.schultz@toolpark.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 195.49.42.12 mail1.screenlight.ch  
Received: from [195.49.42.12] ([195.49.42.12:63594] helo=mail1.screenlight.ch)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id BE/50-51245-DBDCA3E4 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 12:50:06 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.52] ([217.162.146.137])
	(authenticated user lars.schultz@toolpark.com)
	by mail1.screenlight.ch (Kerio Connect 7.0.2 patch 1)
	(using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher AES256-SHA (256 bits))
	for internals@lists.php.net;
	Thu, 4 Aug 2011 18:50:00 +0200
Message-ID: <4E3ACDB6.7020101@toolpark.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 18:49:58 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <CACs9DU4jhCBHEYXd-N1rvYE5jbCDztvXEi=gsZh4ozLoqQrRXw@mail.gmail.com> <CAEZPtU7dB9-ATrKqNF_sk+aeEPuKBZCFxYiZ41T1QSy4xgKLYw@mail.gmail.com> <CACs9DU6MAmJt6veeOEVdkL5spO+8YVgmvbhioc7ORWZH-1d1LQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E3898B0.40809@sugarcrm.com> <CACs9DU4Z2ZR+VkbZoQry=N6WJqR1ZemkODiG7QeUvKNS_d_UHQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E38EC0C.9080304@lerdorf.com> <4E38FA2E.4030605@lsces.co.uk> <4E38FC67.9090200@toolpark.com> <CACs9DU5EsXi1jUDnswOCFiEOMgitOPDQE-X_Pp_G_9L4=dsdkQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAEZPtU79jxjT52=1HYRfaDE0z6cb5pDGD9h4czspiHaOC_-Kyg@mail.gmail.com> <CACs9DU6_oDZAKEDvOxybSvXR5moDCP2ZM=WhLEe+Ui=EkpuToQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACQesk5_bRDXCpuhB-bDb1LF4ks7s1pzSPo90EuSb-NtbPGxRQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAM4sM9Hb3Qyig8xssrJd3YWq9L60xQkXHG9sY9=XOD37wFXLog@mail.gmail.com> <4E39E89F.8060605@sugarcrm.com> <4E3A3643.2070305@toolpark.com> <4E3A4793.2070209@sugarcrm.com> <4E3A91E8.1020107@toolpark.com> <4E3ACA42.8000001@sugarcrm.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E3ACA42.8000001@sugarcrm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Weak References
From: lars.schultz@toolpark.com (Lars Schultz)

Am 04.08.2011 18:35, schrieb Stas Malyshev:
> No, it's not even remotely like that. Using one intermediary function
> and doing the DB call is orders of magnitude apart. You asked how you
> can solve the problem, I showed you how. You can claim you don't like
> the solution, that's fine, everybody has his own taste. But you can't
> claim there's no other solution.

Right. I don't like doing design-stuff how they do it in java either, 
but a little bit of it hasn't hurt anybody, and it's conciseness helps 
readability alot.

I am sure you understand the problem quite well but it's not one of 
yours, obviously. That's fine too. But you can't claim the use-case is 
not valid.