Hi!
On 9/19/11 2:02 AM, Pierre Joye wrote:
Sorry but your constantly rejecting any logical, documented, known
principles for the abstract concept is killing me.
I didn't see any documented principle that say the code I cited is
prohibited. Only example you brought so far is C function declaration
that has nothing to do with OO. You want to prove you point - prove it,
not repeat it.
You are claiming that only way in OO to implement contacts is have the whole
hierarchy enforce exactly
the same function signatures
You miss one word, abstract. And that's what you actually do not
understand or does not want to.
1. Non-abstract methods have the same problem, as I have already shown you.
2. Abstract has nothing to do with it, abstract just says there's no
default implementation provided so protocol implementor must always
override it. The fact that abstract in PHP works differently is an
artifact of supporting BC, as you yourself recently explained. I don't
know where the notion that abstract methods must have different
signature enforcement and inheritance rules and it's somehow "known
principle" comes from. Its totally not what abstract means in all OO
languages known to me. Could you please cite OO languages that have
different signature enforcement rules for abstracts and non-abstracts?
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
