Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64524 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 14097 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2013 15:27:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 4 Jan 2013 15:27:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=cpriest@zerocue.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=cpriest@zerocue.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zerocue.com designates 67.200.53.250 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: cpriest@zerocue.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.200.53.250 mail.zerocue.com Received: from [67.200.53.250] ([67.200.53.250:42664] helo=mail.zerocue.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 19/01-00128-BF4F6E05 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 10:27:55 -0500 Received: from [172.16.10.217] (unknown [97.79.213.78]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.zerocue.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2CDE812034E; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 15:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50E6F501.4090806@zerocue.com> Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 09:28:01 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stas Malyshev CC: PHP Developers Mailing List References: <50E41BB6.4030901@zerocue.com> <50E648BE.2060005@zerocue.com> <50E6822D.9060807@sugarcrm.com> <71B3F435-4289-473B-B4D7-EB2DB5F888A9@zerocue.com> <7213E637-26A2-4F44-82DE-297E751726CD@zerocue.com> In-Reply-To: <7213E637-26A2-4F44-82DE-297E751726CD@zerocue.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010402060403000106090406" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [PHP-RFC] Property Accessors 1.2 : parent::$foo Issue From: cpriest@zerocue.com (Clint Priest) --------------010402060403000106090406 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Uhm.. brain fart. I was thinking $this->$foo was normal when I wrote this up, I would change my last statement from the earlier email to any syntax which did not include a $. That being said then, I think I favor parent->foo the best. One other possible alternative would be to treat parent "like a variable..." $parent->foo On 1/4/2013 5:09 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > Speaking of which, parent::foo ( with :: but no $) might work as well, almost *any* character change could work... > > parent:::$foo > parent:$foo > parent->$foo > parent->foo > parent.$foo > parent.foo > > I favor having the $ in some solution though... > > -Clint > > On Jan 4, 2013, at 5:04 AM, Clint Priest wrote: > >> Missed that bit... I think that would add two bits of inconsistency though... (Without the $) >> >> -Clint >> >> On Jan 4, 2013, at 1:18 AM, Stas Malyshev wrote: >> >>> Hi! >>> >>>> A recent suggestion from Stas is to use parent->$foo (note the use of -> >>>> rather than ::) >>> I actually proposed parent->foo. parent->$foo implies the name of the >>> variable is "$foo", not "foo" - just as in $this->$foo. Yes, I know it >>> does not match parent::$foo - but I can't do much about it. In any case, >>> better not to add another inconsistency to the list of existing ones. >>> >>> -- >>> Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect >>> SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ >>> (408)454-6900 ext. 227 >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> -- -Clint --------------010402060403000106090406--