2016-12-29 16:12 GMT+03:00 Mathieu Rochette <math...@rochette.cc>: > I find that using the decorator pattern is very verbose and maybe > something could be done about that, > an article[1] I saw proposed a "decorates" keyword to solves this, here is > how it might look like in PHP: >
> * the constructor is optional and default to take the first argument and > put it in $decorated > * if the constructor is provided PHP check that $decorated is set and > implements the decorated interface or class > * all public methods not overridden are automatically proxied to the > decorated object > > There is at least a few different ways to go about this, the previous > example was just to give you a preview of what it could be. If there is > interest I'd like to write an RFC for this :) > > What do you think about this ? > Hi! I think that language doesn't need any additional keywords for that. What you describe is pure class inheritance and it's already available in the language. To be honest I use class inheritance in Go! AOP to define decorators because of some nice features: 1. No overhead for calling non-decorated method (we can wrap only required methods) 2. Only one single instance of class, whereas traditional proxy and decorator pattern will use two instances (one for the original instance itself and one more instance for proxy/decorator) What your want can be implemented with the help of one single aspect, applied to your codebase. Then framework will automatically create decorators for every required class in your system. For logging decorator example see my blogpost here: http://go.aopphp.com/blog/2013/07/21/implementing-logging-aspect-with-doctrine-annotations/
