Em Tue, 26 Jul 2011 12:14:15 +0100, Laruence <larue...@php.net> escreveu:
2011/7/26 Gustavo Lopes <glo...@nebm.ist.utl.pt>:
Em Tue, 26 Jul 2011 06:42:50 +0100, Laruence <larue...@php.net>
escreveu:
2011/7/25 Laruence <larue...@php.net>:
#54556 array access to empty var does not trigger a notice
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=54556
Won't this be affected?
<?php
$foo[] = 'bar';
no, this situation won't be affected
Ah, if this is only for read situations, a notice seems appropriate.
#55128 SplFixedArray::fromArray() does not use extended class
This doesn't look like a good idea. The constructor is not called (and
in general can't be, since we can't know how the subclass constructor
looks
like), so the new object can be in an illegal state.
After much thought, I think there maybe no reason for fixedarray
extended class to define it's own constructor, since we provide
fixedarrary::__construct and fromArray already, and extended class
should only get an instance through calling them.
so I think we can make fixedarray::__construct final to make this
feature works.
I disagree. Besides being a BC break, there's no good reason to make the
constructor final and it has the disadvantage of severely limiting the
subclasses.
Instead of using LSB, I think a better option would be to provided a
protected final instance method that would do this special form of
initialization from an array. Subclasses could then write their own static
method (possibly with the same name) for initializing from an array or
even accept an array as a constructor argument. This is a bit more work
and less magic than LSB, but much more versatile.
--
Gustavo Lopes
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
