Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:67842
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain tutteli.ch designates 80.74.154.78 as permitted sender)
To: "'Stas Malyshev'" <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>,
	"'Anthony Ferrara'" <ircmaxell@gmail.com>
Cc: <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAAyV7nGo4+n_4Ad7oKyuvLWTtmnui7fn6s-noCwG2PtT5A70tQ@mail.gmail.com> <51C9FA9C.8050403@sugarcrm.com> <CAAyV7nHz0E2Tmin5_S4OVii=U1HhuKKL6y_KAa+j=X7DT9My6g@mail.gmail.com> <51CA1C93.6080500@sugarcrm.com> <CAAyV7nHo-ZLx2F=+6URctZXTqx8tLgR=xG7j0wJ3unmiCxGvXQ@mail.gmail.com> <51CA24C5.9090505@sugarcrm.com>
In-Reply-To: <51CA24C5.9090505@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 01:28:01 +0200
Message-ID: <004201ce71fb$a2d6a8f0$e883fad0$@tutteli.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQF3b2Sgpi7WETnNUQtx1g4EUX4mfAF72DBlAqekqcoB9RF6fQIoX6hZAT6cKNaZqRql8A==
Content-Language: de-ch
Subject: AW: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Protocol Type Hinting
From: rstoll@tutteli.ch ("Robert Stoll")

IMO GO like interfaces become handy in the following situation:

Library A wants that you pass a class at some point (let's say a logger)
which implements interface ALogger (as defined by lib A)=20
Library B wants that you pass a class at some point which implements
interface BLogger

Both interfaces are identical (at the moment). There is no need to write =
an
adaptor for one of those libraries if GO like interfaces are used.
That's one use case for GO like interfaces (which of course could also =
be
misused)

@Anthony
You also outline that protocols can be used for classes which make =
classes
somewhat like interfaces. I do not like this idea and I am not familiar =
with
GO but I doubt they use it like this. That really counteracts the =
principle
that you should implement against an interface/abstraction.

-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Stas Malyshev [mailto:smalyshev@sugarcrm.com]=20
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. Juni 2013 01:16
An: Anthony Ferrara
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Betreff: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Protocol Type Hinting

Hi!

> So nobody should ever use libraries, because they can't be sure of=20
> that code... So...

Libraries have classes and interfaces for exactly this reason - so you =
can
be reasonably sure what's in them or at least have easy way to check it.

> It's checking that fatal method-not-defined erros won't be thrown...

But instead a fatal "protocol does not match" error will be thrown. The
difference?

> It gives the ability for a method to be defensive by preventing=20
> E_FATAL errors. That's not adding something significant?

I fail to see the difference between one error and another error. The =
whole
"catchable" thing is very artificial difference and as far as I'm =
concerned,
if that's the problem, just make method-not-defined "catchable", =
whatever
that might mean - there's no difference on the substance that I can see.

> I agree the use-cases are slightly weak. This is a draft RFC. It's=20
> supposed to help identify the areas where we can improve it. Help=20
> identify use-cases. Help dig it out.

My personal opinion regarding design always was that use cases come =
first.
If I don't have a use case, there's nothing to design. So I'd like to =
see
the convincing use case first. Then, once it's convincing, we can talk =
about
implementation details - so yes, you can discard all the performance, =
etc.
talk - it's not important right now, the most important thing is the use
cases.

--
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