Lazare Inepologlou wrote on 27/11/2014 10:35:
2014-11-27 4:47 GMT+01:00 guilhermebla...@gmail.com <
guilhermebla...@gmail.com>:
Hi,
I worked on an implementation of a somehow controversial concept that
exists in hack and C#: abstract final classes.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/abstract_final_class
My motivation is to further expand class support to add modifiers (PPP -
public, protected, private). I added this change to initially segregate
grammar rules. It was an easy feature without extensive complexity and
covers some use-cases.
"Abstract final" is a strange way to name it. What you want is a "static"
class:
* The fact that one cannot initialise an abstract class is only a side
effect. Abstract classes are meant to be used for inheritance.
* Abstract static methods are not possible (one more reason why abstract is
a bad name).
* A "static" class does not have to be final, given the fact that PHP is
one of the few languages that offer a robust Late Static Binding.
This has always been my feeling. To me, "abstract" means "must be
extended", and "final" means "can't be extended", so combining the two
seems like a self-contradiction.
The fact that abstract classes allow static methods to be called without
sub-classing always seems a bit odd to me - it's as though only the
constructor is really abstract, not the whole class.
A "static" class, however, whether "final" or not, is definitely
something I've wanted.
Regards,
--
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
