Hi!
On 9/17/11 2:39 PM, Richard Quadling wrote:
An interface is the absolute here. Sub classes (the super class being
abstract or otherwise), should be able to define MORE parameters (with
or without default values). Otherwise they aren't extending, but
implementing - and for me that's the role
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Richard Quadling wrote:
> My question was due to the documentation commit
> http://news.php.net/php.doc.cvs/8818 and
> http://news.php.net/php.doc.cvs/8819.
Just to clarify (as I'm not sure you got that change right): PHP has
enforced signatures for methods define
On 17 September 2011 15:52, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
> maybe Richard referring to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55085 ?
> but those change only affects the abstract classes.
>
> Tyrael
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Nikita Popov
> wrote:
>> Hi Richard!
>>
>> Which change are you talking abou
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 20:08, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 17:08, Laruence wrote:
>>
>>> class A { public function init($a, $b) { } }
class B extends A { public function init($a) { } }
=> PHP Strict Standards: Declaration of B::init() s
Hi!
On 9/17/11 6:27 AM, Richard Quadling wrote:
With the recent BC with regard the locking of the constructor's
signature for subclasses, what is the expected mechanism for allowing
a subclass to have additional parameters?
I think the whole "strict parameters" thing has gone into somewhat wro
Am 17.09.2011 20:08, schrieb Stas Malyshev:
> Hi!
>
>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 17:08, Laruence wrote:
class A { public function init($a, $b) { } }
class B extends A { public function init($a) { } }
=> PHP Strict Standards: Declaration of B::init() should be compa
Hi!
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 17:08, Laruence wrote:
class A { public function init($a, $b) { } }
class B extends A { public function init($a) { } }
=> PHP Strict Standards: Declaration of B::init() should be compatible
with
that of A::init()
do you know any reason for this?
>> do you know any reason for this?
>>
>
> The reason for this is simply that B must act like A since every B object is
> also an object of A.
>
>
The reason for restricting the method signature in the Subclass is to
guarantee that an instance of a Subclass should work where an instance
of the Su
2011/9/17 Etienne Kneuss :
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 17:15, Laruence wrote:
>>
>> Hi:
>> this is really a big bc break...(fatal error)
>> is there any reason for us to really change this? In Yaf, there
>> are a lot of Abstract classes, the subclass only need declared there
>> argument whe
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 17:15, Laruence wrote:
> Hi:
> this is really a big bc break...(fatal error)
> is there any reason for us to really change this? In Yaf, there
> are a lot of Abstract classes, the subclass only need declared there
> argument when they really need it.
>
Well, that is
2011/9/17 Etienne Kneuss :
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 17:08, Laruence wrote:
>>
>> 2011/9/17 :
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I think Richards intended other methods often used in combination with
>> > __construct:
>> >
>> > class A { public function init($a, $b) { } }
>> > class B extends A { p
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 17:08, Laruence wrote:
> 2011/9/17 :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think Richards intended other methods often used in combination with
> > __construct:
> >
> > class A { public function init($a, $b) { } }
> > class B extends A { public function init($a) { } }
> >
> > => PH
Hi:
this is really a big bc break...(fatal error)
is there any reason for us to really change this? In Yaf, there
are a lot of Abstract classes, the subclass only need declared there
argument when they really need it.
and I really not think this change is good one, the Intenal class
can
2011/9/17 :
> Hi,
>
> I think Richards intended other methods often used in combination with
> __construct:
>
> class A { public function init($a, $b) { } }
> class B extends A { public function init($a) { } }
>
> => PHP Strict Standards: Declaration of B::init() should be compatible wi
maybe Richard referring to https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=55085 ?
but those change only affects the abstract classes.
Tyrael
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Nikita Popov wrote:
> Hi Richard!
>
> Which change are you talking about? I just tried doing:
> class A { public functio
Hi,
I think Richards intended other methods often used in combination with
__construct:
class A { public function init($a, $b) { } }
class B extends A { public function init($a) { } }
=> PHP Strict Standards: Declaration of B::init() should be compatible with
that of A::init()
The ex
Hi Richard!
Which change are you talking about? I just tried doing:
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> With the recent BC with regard the locking of the constructor's
> signature for subclasses, what is the expected mechanism for allowing
> a subclass to have additional parameters?
>
> You can always supply th
Hi.
With the recent BC with regard the locking of the constructor's
signature for subclasses, what is the expected mechanism for allowing
a subclass to have additional parameters?
You can always supply them and use func_get_args() / func_num_args() /
etc. to read them.
It would seem that the lim
18 matches
Mail list logo
