Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:78952
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.52 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <546B987B.2080808@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:05:31 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <546B0F62.1090705@gmail.com> <546B3D07.2090203@hoa-project.net> <CAH-PCH4whBo-+sAzCUROTEP4Tq6uMML+nwYFkHfLuyTNcSVs7g@mail.gmail.com> <7B7BA983-3A5B-4FB1-8C02-0B88C81407C2@ajf.me> <546B5562.4030907@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <546B5562.4030907@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Default constructors
From: smalyshev@gmail.com (Stanislav Malyshev)

Hi!

>> I'd certainly like it if everything descended from some class (Object?
>> StdClass?), but I don't like the idea of an empty construct. As

Making everything descend from the same class may require a number of
changes and much bigger design effort than this RFC aims at, with wider
BC implications. As for not liking the idea of empty construct - that's
too bad since PHP already has it and had it since forever. You just
can't call it with parent:: syntax - but you perfectly can use it (not
sure you can say "call" since no call is actually happening) with new.

>> Anthony pointed out last time, you can't do inheritance and
>> simultaneously treat the parent class as a black box.

I'm not sure what is meant here. Calling parent ctor is a base OOP
technique, everybody does that, it's one of the first best practices
people learn when doing OO. Only in PHP, it's weird since you have to
know if parent defined ctor or not, and if that changes, patch all your
descendant classes. That's just bad OO implementation.