Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:88156
Return-Path: <morrison.levi@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 42357 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2015 16:08:25 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 11 Sep 2015 16:08:25 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=morrison.levi@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=morrison.levi@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.223.176 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: morrison.levi@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.223.176 mail-io0-f176.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.223.176] ([209.85.223.176:34759] helo=mail-io0-f176.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 3F/C0-37684-87CF2F55 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 12:08:24 -0400
Received: by iofb144 with SMTP id b144so103762063iof.1
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:08:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
         :from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=mYVGe9M/fhWcMOufKUUXC7zSX1Za92OVZ2wZzccSmyQ=;
        b=GvB/xgmLoVle9KfY/DwBlt9PfQjHVBIhQWQMHkh85EXFEH/CRew052r9LitKSp4G2t
         TtQDQf+bXM08O8ROrZ8xV35eT3BA2J5HqfFQJvpuZebrI+Tbwl8GjvfPhbLFNSmTmGAt
         FxoiDqso/Y61yVJblemWXv3SZjZ8EHOSpFUuHyEGnVHor22XFIS4/FYrhgZhBAHJLX41
         4UXfTcOPc+3Xmua5Qbw889btQgN0UAsmy6VJtyIGJP4DqJh2xocKHaw6/5Te1Z+wNaFD
         x9I9/9ntVPjB/AQ8Ivyd6ynBQDlkPVZXvSQPN/pG/z5BmAW2egBNXR0EhJO1/J+fgwFO
         vU8w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.34.85 with SMTP id i82mr5774338ioi.129.1441987701681;
 Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:08:21 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: morrison.levi@gmail.com
Received: by 10.79.37.71 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:08:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANeXGWVbUO_JjU2LQp9_Aa+EFbVC+qHRdniWtJTuHyVcfMU5JQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <55E4B9AA.9060906@dasprids.de>
	<55F20B8D.3010805@dennis.birkholz.biz>
	<55F20E72.6050309@dasprids.de>
	<CAFMT4No79fuX8BxD6fnHDQEstL4r8sAY7Bhvem3pyctqnvdmfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANeXGWVbUO_JjU2LQp9_Aa+EFbVC+qHRdniWtJTuHyVcfMU5JQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:08:21 -0600
X-Google-Sender-Auth: c_YW3HZvqdOjEfqP1Hy3WozK5dA
Message-ID: <CAFMT4NpCb3xXt5TE+K9=GVRf95Z0m6j_xvSj9aeKtX9Ob1EUFA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Korvin Szanto <korvinszanto@gmail.com>
Cc: "Ben Scholzen 'DASPRiD'" <mail@dasprids.de>, Dennis Birkholz <php@dennis.birkholz.biz>, 
	internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Generic classes and methods RFC
From: levim@php.net (Levi Morrison)

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Korvin Szanto <korvinszanto@gmail.com> wrote:
> Levi,
> It's my understanding that the "type variable" is a member of the instance
> and not of the class. In at least java, generics are unavailable in static
> context[1] though they can be specifically defined on the static method
> itself[2].
>
> [1]
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/936377/static-method-in-a-generic-class
> [2] https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/extra/generics/methods.html
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 8:28 AM Levi Morrison <levim@php.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Ben Scholzen 'DASPRiD'
>> <mail@dasprids.de> wrote:
>> > Hi Dennis,
>> >
>> > thanks for your feedback, see my answers below:
>> >
>> >> 1. static methods:
>> >>
>> >> class Foo<T> {
>> >>         public static function test() {
>> >>         }
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> how can I call the method:
>> >> a) Foo::test()
>> >> or
>> >> b) Foo<int>::test()
>> >>
>> >> in case b), would the generic methods not be a duplication?
>> >
>> >
>> > Case a) is correct here. A static method is not in the context of an
>> > instance, so it doesn't know about the class boxing by itself.
>>
>> I think b would be correct. Can you explain this rationale a bit more?

This may be how it works in Java, but this is not Java. All behavior
must be outlined and justified, especially because not all languages
behave the same as Java with regards to generic-like behavior. Notably
C++ does not share this characteristic. If this generic ability is
confined only to classes/interfaces and only to instance methods that
is a large limitation. Even if that is what is decided there must be
rationale for choosing it to be that way.