reeze wrote:
> Hi,
> I am not sure it's the right place to discuss this. someday I found I call a
> static method _instancely_.
> the method is just a helper method when reviewing my code. I know I do the
> wrong thing, but PHP doesn't
> complain about it. then I do some tests like below:
A few corrections to your test case so it actually works.
> <?php
> error_reporting(E_ALL ^ E_STRICT);
I think you want E_ALL | E_STRICT
> class A {
> public function static staticFunc() {
This is a parse error. static should be placed before function.
> echo "static";
> }
> public function instanceFunc() {
> echo "instace";
> }
> }
>
> A::instanceFunct(); // Strict Standards: Non-static method A::instanceFunc()
> ...
And this should be A::instanceFunc();
> $a = new A();
> $a->staticFunc(); // Just static no E_STRICT error raised
>
> I know it's the wrong way to do like these, maybe there are some historical
> reasons to allow these.
> I just wonder why previous method call raise E_STRICT but later not.
>
> Yes, something could be done doesn't means we should, but we could stop
> things like happened.
I think it may be related to inheritance.
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
