For my part, I use abstract classes as routines libraries. That is, instead of having tons of functions lying freely outside of any classes, I use classifications. Each class represents a type a categorie of action.
The whole point of having private functions in abstract classes is when public functions use them "from the inside" (self::PrivateFunction()) without the class being actually declared, as in my case. Just my 2 cents On 6/9/05, Stanislav Malyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > JL>>some of them yet, but I release this code to be used. Someone comes along > JL>>and extends my class. If I have these future planned functions in as > JL>>abstract private, then they are protected for my future use in the base > JL>>class. The user extending my class will realize he needs to use a > different > JL>>function name. > > How would he? Private methods by definition can't be seen by child > classes, so whatever you do with private methods would have no influence > on inheriting class. That's the whole point in it, why I think it's of no > use - because you can't meaningfully both require override (abstract) and > hide from inherited classes (private). > > -- > Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.115 > > -- > 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
