On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Diogo,
>
> Sunday, August 31, 2008, 12:50:15 AM, you wrote:
>
>> Exactly...
>
>> Is that normal workings or more like a bugie one?
>
>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:02 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Diogo Neves escribió:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm emailling to ask why __call isn't called when you call a private
>>>>> method from outside of function...
>>>>
>>>> Please provide example code ;-)
>>>
>>> He means this:
>>>
>>> class foo {
>>> private function bar() { }
>>> function __call($f,$a) {
>>> echo "called $f";
>>> }
>>> }
>>> $a = new foo;
>>> $a->bar();
>>>
>
> In the above code you clearly try to call a private method.
As Mike Lively before point to me __get, and after i tried __set,
works diferently as u can see:
<?php
class foo {
private $a = 'a';
public function __set( $name, $value ) {
return $this->$name = $value;
}
public function __get( $name ) {
return $this->$name;
}
}
$obj = new foo;
$obj->a = 'b';
echo( $obj->a );
?>
My problem was that i only had work with __get and expected same
behavior for __call :)
There is
> nothing more to say. In the following case it coul dbe a bit different:
>
> <?php
> class foo {
> private function test() {
> echo __METHOD__ . "\n";
> }
> }
> class bar extends foo {
> function __call($name, $args) {
> echo __METHOD__ . "($name)\n";
> }
> }
> $obj = new foo;
> $obj->test();
> ?>
>
> This is different because we call into an object of type bar. Now in scope
> bar we do not know anything about foo::test.
<?php
class foo {
private $a = 'a';
public function test() {
echo( $this->a );
}
}
class bar extends foo {
private $a = 'b';
public function test2() {
echo( $this->a );
}
}
$obj = new bar;
$obj->test();
$obj->test2();
?>
Now i understood what u mean by 'bar' scope...
:S I'm in need of a good scope article, some one know a good one?
That said we should probably
> allow __call there rather than the error. And it is easy enought o fix as
> we know that in bar we have only inherited foo::test.
>
> If we move __call into foo it is the other way around then again. This is
> because we will call into the object and start method resolution at scope
> bar. As that does not know anything about test, we will use the inherited
> method call to dynamically handle the call. However, that means we are in
> scope foo where we do know about test and hence should issue the error.
> But we will have a harder time issuing that error. As inside the engine we
> actually never go down to scope foo and instead simply use the inherited
> __call.
>
> So yes, this can be seen as a bug and part of it can easily be fixed. But
> I do not see an easy way to fix it 100% according to inheritance rules.
>
> Best regards,
> Marcus
>
--
Thanks for your attention,
Diogo Neves
Web Developer @ SAPO.pt by PrimeIT.pt
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
