2008/5/6 Lars Strojny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Marcus!
>
> Am Dienstag, den 06.05.2008, 21:45 +0200 schrieb Marcus Boerger:
> [...]
>
> > All fine with me. However we *would* need to specify which function is
> > getter, setter, isset or unset.
>
> [...]
>
> >
> > public $property {
> > string public function __get() {
> > return $this->_property;
> > }
> > string protected function __set(string $value) {...}
> > }
>
> That's the variant I prefer. It is pretty similar to the C# does it and
> therefore follows the common PHP strategy of steeling everything
> together ;)
>
> [...]
>
> > The advantage of keeping everything inside the property definition is that
> > there is no need at all for any new keyword. And the handlers cannot get
> > separated. The disadvantage is that the functions are always named __get
> and
> > so on for all properties, so PHP would need to do an internal renaming.
> > Which means we probably would not be able to call the functions manually.
>
> Do you see any real use-case for calling them directly?
>
>
> > That larger handlers could clutter the code doesn't appear to be a
> > disadvantage for me as it can easily be avoided if the handler just
> > forwards the call.
>
> Either that or folding in the editor helps etc. pp.
>
>
> > The next question I have now is what to do when people want direct access
> > to the underlying value?
>
> I would think that accessing $this->property from __get()/__set() of the
> property would address the value itself. Everything else would be
> redirected to the accessors.
>
>
> > Or do we force people to always specify get,set,isset und unset? Or
> > should we only enforce get/set and have isset
> > and unset emulated with them (isset()~>isset(get()),
> > unset()~>set(NULL))?
>
> Not sure about that. Forcing the user to define four accessors for a
> property seems to be clutter but it would be - technically spoken -
> correct. I don't have a fixed opinion here.
>
> cu, Lars
>
You would only normally need to define the four accessors if your
property isn't a bog standard one or you didn't want to trigger any
activity when a property changed.
class foo {
public $bar;
}
is fine. foo::bar is a completely normal property as we know it.
--
-----
Richard Quadling
Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
"Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
