Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:95384
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.45 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: julienpauli@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CAEbg-4ZAMB=Em-nwCp++K3n59btaFSgW-yexhg3cbM3bQ1WjTg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEbg-4ZAMB=Em-nwCp++K3n59btaFSgW-yexhg3cbM3bQ1WjTg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 18:00:18 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMUwpuQe1bS1D9KVRKkqd7-jXw8sx_mWUDrxDjX=i9J5LQSnwg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexander Lisachenko <lisachenko.it@gmail.com>
Cc: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] BC break: ReflectionMethod::invoke() expects parameter
 1 to be object, string given
From: jpauli@php.net (Julien Pauli)

I agree this is a BC break and should not stay as-is in source code.

It makes some testsuites fail, that did not fail before ; thus it breaks th=
ings.


I think @Alexander is right.
We should allow passing a string, and perform some Late Static Binding
through it.
That would solve the BC Break problem as well as extend the feature in
a more PHP-friendly way.



Julien




On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Alexander Lisachenko
<lisachenko.it@gmail.com> wrote:
> First argument can be a normal string with a valid scope class name for
> static methods. This can be useful for calling parent static methods, see
> my example.
>
> I think this will be comparable with Closure::call() method and scope
> binding.
>
> =D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BD=D0=B5=D0=B4=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=BD=D0=B8=D0=BA, 22 =
=D0=B0=D0=B2=D0=B3=D1=83=D1=81=D1=82=D0=B0 2016 =D0=B3. =D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BB=
=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C Rowan Collins =D0=BD=
=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB:
>
>> On 22/08/2016 16:40, Christoph M. Becker wrote:
>>
>>> It is still ignored if it is a valid object, so the current beta's
>>>> > behaviour doesn't actually make a lot of sense.
>>>>
>>> Well, see <https://3v4l.org/n8cad>.  Only as of 7.1.0beta3 ::invoke()
>>> matches the behavior of ::invokeArgs().
>>>
>>
>> OK, so that's a further inconsistency. The current version still doesn't
>> actually make sense, though. If you want to validate that the correct
>> argument is being passed, then the only value allowed should be null.
>>
>> If so desired, I can revert that commit, but I wouldn't be happy with
>>> sticking with a completely unused parameter, which obviously has been
>>> and still is misunderstood.
>>>
>>
>> The parameter is still unused, and can be any object. The only sane
>> validation would be to check explicitly for null, which is documented as
>> the correct argument for both invoke() and invokeArgs().
>>
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Rowan Collins
>> [IMSoP]
>>
>> --
>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>>
>>