Zeev Suraski wrote:
At 16:50 01/03/2006, Lukas Smith wrote:
Dmitry Stogov wrote:
1) I would very like to see some real example where "static" is
necessary?
I think Mike illustrated this in his post. Or do you want a "real"
world example?
2) "static" is really bad name. I suggest "caller", Marcus thought about
"class".
I dont really see an issue with calling the thing "static" considering
its about late static binding. Also AFAIK this name was agreed upong
in Paris. A meeting you also attended.
I actually don't recall there was consensus on even adding this feature
in the Paris meeting, let alone how to name it.
but there is a problem no? as illustrated by:
http://blog.joshuaeichorn.com/archives/2006/01/09/zactiverecord-cant-work/
I ran into this problem with Ard Biesheuvel with php5beta3. he considered
the fact that 'self' didn't resolve to the actual class being called a flaw,
I argee with him.
Either way, implementation wise, as Dmitry said - storing runtime
information in zend_function or zend_op_array is simply out of the
question.
do you agree that 'a' feature is needed to satisfy the illustrated problem(s)?
kind regards,
Jochem
{simpletons idea ...}
rather than an alternative form of static method calling or a new class
related keyword, maybe a new magic constant would be sufficient? e.g.
__CCLASS__ (C for 'Called')
or
__OWNER__ (the class the 'owns' the method? [from the view point of
the caller])
Zeev
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
