Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:84676
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.179 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <5502CFB4.7080406@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 11:53:24 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <6D.2C.32765.10EC0055@pb1.pair.com>	<5500D967.5040800@gmail.com> <CAFMT4NqLaj6G2P9W0dhYc50yt27mmNP1vE+A=c_nYSqTotncUQ@mail.gmail.com> <13.69.64353.73451055@pb1.pair.com> <5501876C.3020107@gmail.com> <3D.85.42021.3E7A1055@pb1.pair.com> <5501B77D.5010800@gmail.com> <85.D1.24603.247C1055@pb1.pair.com> <5501D328.9040800@gmail.com> <98.26.24603.C9DE1055@pb1.pair.com> <5501F823.3060805@gmail.com> <B9.68.24603.1F222055@pb1.pair.com> <55023052.40100@gmx.de> <7B.3E.24603.E83B2055@pb1.pair.com>
In-Reply-To: <7B.3E.24603.E83B2055@pb1.pair.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] static constructor
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

Johannes Ott wrote on 13/03/2015 09:53:
> Am 13.03.2015 um 01:33 schrieb Christoph Becker:
>> Johannes Ott wrote:
>>
>>> And i although see no DI or Singleton pattern to use here to get the
>>> same functionality, if you want to use like Config::getHostname() and
>>> not like Config::getInstance()->getHostname() which is really
>>> unnecessary abstraction level for nothing in my opinion!
>> It is possible, however, to add static wrapper methods to access the
>> singleton's methods, like
>>
>>    public static function getHostname() {
>>        return self::getInstance()->_getHostname();
>>    }
>>
> I really do not understand why everybody here seems to try to use
> Singleton where ever it is possible. Indeed Singletons are a nice Design
> Pattern, but they are no universal remedy for every problem just for the
> fact you can use it there as well.
>
> Why are in your opinion static members are not allowed to hold more
> complexe datastructures then simple scalars?

Complex data structures, yes (and I see the use of __static in such 
cases). Architectural logic gluing one class to another (as in your 
Logger example), no.


> Please give me one valid
> argument why I should double all of the functions in my code for a
> static and non-static access beside the argument that I "have to" use a
> Singleton.

You don't need to double all the calls. In fact, the majority of your 
code should not even know the Singleton is there, because they should be 
treating it as though they have an instance. At certain key points in 
your code (constructors, the top of methods) you add $foo = 
Foo::getInstance();, then all your calls look like $foo->doBar();

That's the way I do it, anyway - treat getting the instance for a 
singleton like importing a variable from global scope, which is 
basically what it's doing.

Regards,
-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]