Hi!
> that statement in the RFC is still true. On this subject, are you
> (personally) okay with the current approach for creating automatic
> accessors (i.e. create PHP code string and compile)?
It might be more efficient to generate the opcodes directly, since they
are always the same and you'd really need to only plug the string into
one place (or in case of typehints, two places), but I don't have
preference one way or another, depending on which is easier. If we won't
have reentrancy, line numbers, etc. issues then generating a string may
be easier and also more robust if opcodes ever change.
> Just to make sure I got it all right, you are suggesting:
> * Parentheses must be used on all accessors, so it's set($value) {} and
> get() {} and isset() {} and unset() {} and something like get {} is not
> possible?
> * Automatic accessors don't have parentheses so they are just set; get;
> isset; unset;
>
> Is that right? If so, then I think it's a reasonable approach.
Yes, I think this makes it look consistent - albeit at the price of some
added verbosity.
--
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
