# Problems with LSB - Thread: https://externals.io/message/35348 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/35348 - Started by Sebastian Deutsch on 2008-02-11T02:40:14+00:00 - Messages: 7 - Reply by email to internals@lists.php.net - More for agents: search with https://externals.io/search.md?q={query} · JSON API at https://externals.io/api · documentation at https://externals.io/llms.txt --- ## #35348 — Sebastian Deutsch — 2008-02-11T02:40:14+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/35348#35348 Hello, i've written the following code using Etiennes LSB. But I'm facing some problems. moo(); // echos "C" - wtf?? should be B ?> Is it a bug, or did I miss anything? Sebastian Deutsch --- ## #35365 — Lokrain — 2008-02-11T11:19:43+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/35348#35365 · In reply to: #35348 Hello, Sebastian This seems to be a known bug http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=43408 and in fact already assigned. Fallbacks occur in static/self calls, as static/self resolve to "foo" > and it returns foo as expected. > > However, when you do a parent::demo() you actually call bar::demo(), > which is currently understood as a "fully qualified call": the caller is > not passed. > > There are plans to allow explicit parent call to pass the caller, but > this is *still under discussion*. --- ## #35367 — Sebastian Deutsch — 2008-02-11T11:39:06+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/35348#35367 · In reply to: #35365 Hello, care... my case is slightly different. I was aware of that problem, but in my case I call B::foo() from the main scope - it behaves right - when I call it within the scope of C (same call) it behaves different. This is different as described in the bug. The same call should have the same output, not depending of the scope where I call it. Sebastian Lokrain schrieb: > Hello, Sebastian > > This seems to be a known bug http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=43408 and in > fact already assigned. > > Fallbacks occur in static/self calls, as static/self resolve to "foo" > > […] --- ## #35369 — Sebastian Deutsch — 2008-02-11T13:00:58+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/35348#35369 · In reply to: #35367 Hello, that's it. Even $b = new B; $b->foo(); // echos "B" - good works. Thank you! *.sebastian Sebastian Deutsch schrieb: > Hello, > > care... my case is slightly different. I was aware of that problem, but > in my case I call B::foo() from the main scope - it behaves right - > when I call it within the scope of C (same call) it behaves different. > > This is different as described in the bug. The same call should > have the same output, not depending of the scope where I call it. > > Sebastian > > Lokrain schrieb: > > > […] --- ## #35370 — Etienne Kneuss — 2008-02-11T13:03:38+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/35348#35370 Hello, your foo function is not defined as static, hence no static call is done. > Strict Standards: Non-static method A::foo() should not be called statically, assuming $this from incompatible context ... Define your method as static and it should work just fine. Regards On Feb 11, 2008 12:39 PM, Sebastian Deutsch wrote: > Hello, > > care... my case is slightly different. I was aware of that problem, but > in my case I call B::foo() from the main scope - it behaves right - > when I call it within the scope of C (same call) it behaves different. > > This is different as described in the bug. The same call should > have the same output, not depending of the scope where I call it. > > Sebastian > > Lokrain schrieb: > > > > […] > > > -- > > > > > -- Etienne Kneuss http://www.colder.ch Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction. -- Pascal --- ## #35371 — Moritz Bechler — 2008-02-11T13:03:46+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/35348#35371 · In reply to: #35348 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 My original reply missed the list :| Hi, > > i've written the following code using Etiennes LSB. But I'm facing some > problems. > > class A { > function foo() { > echo `get_called_class()`; > } > } > > class B extends A { > } > > class C { > function moo() { > B::foo(); > } > } > > B::foo(); // echos "B" - good > > $c = new C; > $c->moo(); // echos "C" - wtf?? should be B > ?> > > Is it a bug, or did I miss anything? > If you mark your function "foo" static - as you should - its "BB" for me. Moritz Bechler -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHsEeydLVsKnwBr9YRAu8LAJ4+/pnKZ1YzM0wN9k7Vg9eyWaZnUQCeKTrO hgv4dRz1YtLqHRgagUOKwQA= =cxLj -----END PGP SIGNATURE --- ## #35544 — Jingcheng Zhang — 2008-02-18T03:26:20+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/35348#35544 · In reply to: #35370 Hello Etienne, If static:: in static context behaves like $this in object context, it would be much meaningful. If we introduce the "meta class" concept in PHP, then each class is an instance of the meta class, thus we can treat a class as an object, and then it is natural that static members follow the rules of inheritance. This may matches the running style of PHP better, which differs from other languages as PHP (under web environment) activates classes when request arrives, and shutdown them when request finishes, while other Object-Oriented languages persist classes and objects in memory. > Hello, > > your foo function is not defined as static, hence no static call is done. > > […] > statically, assuming $this from incompatible context ... > > Define your method as static and it should work just fine. > > Regards > > On Feb 11, 2008 12:39 PM, Sebastian Deutsch > > wrote: > > […] > in > > […] > is > > […] > > -- > Etienne Kneuss > http://www.colder.ch > > Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as > when they do it from a religious conviction. > -- Pascal > > -- > > > > -- Best regards, Jingcheng Zhang Room 304, Dormitory 26 of Yuquan Campus, Zhejiang University P.R.China