Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:67492
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.128.54 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: ekneuss@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAH-PCH5DGWSmfCjTJdaJtNS4+1N=hM12bGb8eGSuGuhRkmM58w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b642a96e673c29dbaf2f239be15f7f6.squirrel@www.l-i-e.com>
 <519E8ADB.90202@sugarcrm.com> <CAH-PCH6F-upB9tbRotx5YGE4vyZwi0yi5+gOgs9QV3vu8KZryw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKUjMCXMTRvzJUFKFfbz3xV_E2gZ893CDNXjGbuoaKeuJbq2Rw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH-PCH5DGWSmfCjTJdaJtNS4+1N=hM12bGb8eGSuGuhRkmM58w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 17:26:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CACQesk4b+-xdXJ66naKKBh6PcN8M2GaDjyFmqwq_yKXqZa7rmg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Quadling <RQuadling@gmail.com>, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, 
	Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, Richard Lynch <ceo@l-i-e.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b67896020be9704dd786dae
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Cannot call constructor
From: colder@php.net (Etienne Kneuss)

--047d7b67896020be9704dd786dae
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sure the default implementation would have to be identical to the behavior
of not defining one.

I believe the best way to solve these issues is by having an implicit base
class. To some extent, that means BC breaks though.


On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hi.
>>
>> I'm not an expert here, so just thinking out loud ...
>>
>> If a theoretical \PHP\baseclass can have empty
>> __construct()/__destruct(), what about the other magic methods?
>>
>> OK, I suppose cascading some of the magic methods to a parent and having
>> a null parent at the very very bottom of the heap sounds useful. But I'm
>> not totally sure.
>>
>> Is there much/any need for a true base class that ALL classes will exten=
d
>> from, including those in extensions.
>>
>
> it was discussed in the linked thread, personally I agree that those are
> different both in intention and implementation, so shouldn't affected by
> this change.
>
> ps: for example having an empty __sleep() or __wakeup implementation woul=
d
> be entirely differrent that one would expect.
>
> --
> Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
> @Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
>



--=20
Etienne Kneuss
http://www.colder.ch

--047d7b67896020be9704dd786dae--