Well, I'll just chock it up to another learning experience although I disagree that it would complicate the language any more than __call, __get and __set already have.
On a side note, here's a dumb question. I'm learning all this as I go and have never dealt with C or language compilers, the only part that is still a bit fuzzy is the structure of the opline/opcodes. What CS terminology would I want to research to gain a better understanding of how the opcodes are stored and processed. I've traced a running program step by step a few times now and haven't been able to follow what its doing with all the opline construction. I'd appreciate a pointer in the right direction. Also, are there some general guidelines posted anywhere for how & when to submit patches? Thanks Bob Silva -----Original Message----- From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 5:54 PM To: Robert Silva; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Static Constructors I tend to think that static constructors are not a very important feature and therefore I wouldn't want to complicate the language. I don't see a problem with manually calling an initialization method in the case where static initialization isn't good enough. Note in many cases where statics are used (such as Singleton's) that extra if() can be done very nicely. Andi At 05:35 PM 10/5/2004 -0700, Robert Silva wrote: >Well, its at the application level now because the language doesn't provide >another alternative. Preferably, it would be at the system level. Your >argument would be similar to saying that __construct should be explicit and >called at the application level to initialize an object. Static classes may >need initilization as well. This is modeled after C#'s static constructors >and Java's static blocks. It also enables other classes to access complex >static variables directly without going through a static method to >initialize the property first. I agree that its not needed, but now that we >have static class methods, it would be nice for the language to provide >built in initialization facilities. > >Bob > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Noah Botimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 4:57 PM >To: Robert Silva >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Static Constructors > >Hi Robert, > >I hate to sound like a pedant, but shouldn't anything like that be >explicit? That is, do your own check for prerequisite class variables >that need to be set in each static method? Maybe I'm missing the boat, >but I'd say that it would be something that should be at the application >level, rather than at the system/object-model level. > >In your example: > >... >public static function WriteLine($value) { > if (is_null(self::$logfile)) > self::initialize(); > ... >} > >public static initialize() { > self::$logfile = fopen('log.txt', 'a'); >} >... > >Thanks, >-Noah > > >Robert Silva wrote: > > > I've put together a rough implementation of static constructors. I'd like >to > > get peoples thoughts about it then I'll either clean it up and submit it >or > > nuke it. Basically the class constructor __cconstruct (have any better > > ideas?) is called upon the first access to any static property and marks >the > > class entry as initialized. > > > > <? > > > > class Logger { > > public static $logfile = null; > > > > private static function __cconstruct() { > > self::$logfile = fopen('log.txt', 'a'); > > } > > public static function WriteLine($value) { > > $value .= PHP_EOL; > > fputs(self::$logfile, $value, strlen($value)); > > } > > > > } > > > > Logger::WriteLine('Static constructors'); > > > > ?> > > > >-- >PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >-- >PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
