RL>> But we are getting way off the real point which is the question of whether RL>> you should be allowed to call what I suppose is now the deprecated RL>> constructor directly or not. I don't see a good reason why it wouldn't be
I don't see any reason to allow two constructors for a class to exist in the first place, so the question of calling is not that relevant for me. RL>> treated like a normal method in every way. In a few years when people who RL>> have never seen PHP4 happen to create a method with the same name as the RL>> class would get very confused if it didn't work I would think. If it's documented as "constructed can be specified in two forms: 1. ClassName() 2. __construct() " then I see no problem that anyone who is good enough to understand what "<?" means to understand that either. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.109 -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
