# Problem with (namespaced) code extending ReflectionProperty - possible bug? - Thread: https://externals.io/message/42141 - Original archive: https://news-web.php.net/php.internals/42141 - Started by Karsten Dambekalns on 2008-12-08T11:10:27+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 --- ## #42141 — Karsten Dambekalns — 2008-12-08T11:10:27+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/42141#42141 Hi. Running 5.3.0alpha3 now and converting our codebase to the new namespaces syntax. Works fine so far, the new name resolution rules are very usable and lead to cleaner code so far. :) Now I ran into a problem. We have a class extending ReflectionProperty, and I got a complaint about the signature of our getValue() not matching that of the parent class. Ok, I added that stdclass type hint, fine. I thought. Later on it turned out that I need to make that type hint \stdclass as our code is namespaced and I got an error because My\NS\stdclass could not be found. Now I got that signature mismatch warning again. Bummer. I decided to build a small test case, and now the fun starts. According to the manual and the PHP source the signature is this: public function getValue(stdclass $object) This is my test code: ---- snip ---- ---- snip ---- and the result of running that is: ---- snip ---- Declaration of PropertyReflection::getValue() should be compatible with that of ReflectionProperty::getValue() ---- snip ---- I get that result even when using * no type hint * stdClass The result stays the same when adding a namespace declaration and adjusting the typehint variations accordingly. Can anybody shed some light on this? Or should I file a bug report right away? Thanks, Karsten --- ## #42151 — Stanislav Malyshev — 2008-12-08T15:50:52+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/42141#42151 · In reply to: #42141 Hi! > According to the manual and the PHP source the signature is this: > public function getValue(stdclass $object) Manual is unfortunately not exact in this point - true signature for it is public function getValue([object $object]) - i.e. $object is not required and if it's supplied, it doesn't have to be stdclass - any object will do. Thus, engine correctly complains that your signature - required object of stdclass - is not compatible. > > This is my test code: > ---- snip ---- > class PropertyReflection extends ReflectionProperty { > public function getValue(stdclass $object) {} > } > ?> Use public function getValue($object = null) {} instead. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: stas@zend.com --- ## #42160 — Marcus Boerger — 2008-12-08T16:27:40+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/42141#42160 · In reply to: #42151 Hello Stanislav, Monday, December 8, 2008, 4:50:52 PM, you wrote: > Hi! > > […] > Manual is unfortunately not exact in this point - true signature for it > is public function getValue([object $object]) - i.e. $object is not > required and if it's supplied, it doesn't have to be stdclass - any > object will do. Thus, engine correctly complains that your signature - > required object of stdclass - is not compatible. Which reminds me that we still have no way to do that in userland. In userland you cannot write: function foo(Object $bla = NULL). The missing part is 'Object' as a type hint. I once long ago suggested using 'class' as in 'any class member'. But people felt it wouldn't be self explanatory enough. And unfortunately we cannot use 'Object' for obvious reasons. We simply cannot turn that into a reserved word not can we expect no one to have a class named Object already. So my suggestion holds: Let's add type hint 'class' to allow hints for objects. marcus > > […] > Use public function getValue($object = null) {} instead. > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect > stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ > (408)253-8829 MSN: stas@zend.com Best regards, Marcus --- ## #42164 — Rodrigo Saboya — 2008-12-08T16:48:00+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/42141#42164 · In reply to: #42160 > Which reminds me that we still have no way to do that in userland. > In userland you cannot write: > function foo(Object $bla = NULL). > The missing part is 'Object' as a type hint. I once long ago suggested > using 'class' as in 'any class member'. But people felt it wouldn't be > self explanatory enough. And unfortunately we cannot use 'Object' for > obvious reasons. We simply cannot turn that into a reserved word not > can we expect no one to have a class named Object already. > > So my suggestion holds: Let's add type hint 'class' to allow hints for > objects. > > marcus > > > […] > > > […] > > > > > Best regards, > Marcus > I don't think having a Object class built in is such a big issue with namespaces around. Anyone using object type-hinting should have a clue. -- Rodrigo Saboya --- ## #42169 — Marcus Boerger — 2008-12-08T17:12:08+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/42141#42169 · In reply to: #42164 Hello Rodrigo, Monday, December 8, 2008, 5:48:00 PM, you wrote: > > […] > I don't think having a Object class built in is such a big issue with > namespaces around. Anyone using object type-hinting should have a clue. I am not speaking of a built-in object class. Because that is not what the internal parsing does. The internal parsing checks whether a passed-in argument is an instance of any class or not. And we can never have one base class. The engine simply would not allow that becasue it can take instances created from classes provided by different back-ends including other lanugae runtimes. > -- > Rodrigo Saboya Best regards, Marcus --- ## #42170 — Stanislav Malyshev — 2008-12-08T17:15:51+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/42141#42170 · In reply to: #42169 Hi! > I am not speaking of a built-in object class. Because that is not what the > internal parsing does. The internal parsing checks whether a passed-in Right now internal parser is quite detached from what PHP functions could do. If someone would write a proposal to bring them closer together (including all the things like conversions, maybe even combined types like "array or object" :) then I think it'd be cool. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ (408)253-8829 MSN: stas@zend.com --- ## #42196 — Karsten Dambekalns — 2008-12-09T09:47:41+00:00 URL: https://externals.io/message/42141#42196 · In reply to: #42151 Hi. Stanislav Malyshev wrote: > > […] ... > Use public function getValue($object = null) {} instead. Thanks, that works! I saw the [] in the C source, but failed to draw the right conclusion... Regards, Karsten PS: Having a way to type hint on any object would be cool!