Hello internals,
As far as I can tell from previous conversations and PRs; static properties
aren’t supported in readonly classes for technical reasons and because nobody
was sure what to do with them ...
... but that seems weird because you can also do something like this:
https://3v4l.org/u
On Thu, 11 May 2006, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> Yep I agree but unfortunately it seems that most people on the dev team either
> don't care or don't speak up.
> Also, I asked time and again to add BC breaking changes to an UPGRADING file.
> Had that been done we would have noticed and could have reacte
Yep I agree but unfortunately it seems that most people on the dev
team either don't care or don't speak up.
Also, I asked time and again to add BC breaking changes to an
UPGRADING file. Had that been done we would have noticed and could
have reacted.
At 05:17 AM 5/11/2006, Derick Rethans wro
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
> Marcus Boerger wrote:
> > It is just some decision that was taken that the newer OO stuff should be a
> > bit more strict.
>
> I don't remember any such decision. I don't even remember a discussion about
> it. I'm aware of the efforts of some people t
On Tue, 2 May 2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Edin and me discussed the issue a bit more in detail and shared memories
> of discussions from the original php 5.0 development. As a conclusion we
> came to the idea that we should revive the idea of a 'strict flag' that
> decides whether member varia
Hello Folks,
Edin and me discussed the issue a bit more in detail and shared memories
of discussions from the original php 5.0 development. As a conclusion we
came to the idea that we should revive the idea of a 'strict flag' that
decides whether member variables (both static and non static) can
Hi Marcus,
Marcus Boerger wrote:
> There was no endless discussion like we to often do on the list but instead
> it was just something we came to agree upon among those implementing it
> while implementing it.
In other words there was no public discussion whatsoever ;)
Well since we're are talki
Hello Jochem,
Wednesday, April 26, 2006, 9:39:40 PM, you wrote:
> Marcus Boerger wrote:
>> Hello Jochem,
> hi Marcus,
>>>(anyone with the argument that PHP!=Ruby or PHP!=Javascript might consider
>>>that
>>>PHP!="the OO paradigm")
>>
>>
>> PHP simply supports its own set and view of OO.
>>
Hello Edin,
Wednesday, April 26, 2006, 10:59:56 PM, you wrote:
> Marcus Boerger wrote:
>> It is just some decision that was taken that the newer OO stuff should be a
>> bit more strict.
> I don't remember any such decision. I don't even remember a discussion
> about it. I'm aware of the efforts
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Jochem,
hi Marcus,
thanks for your response (It remains a bit of a honour when
someone from the dev ranks takes time to give feedback -
new insight often follows as secondary benefit).
Tuesday, April 25, 2006, 3:15:52 PM, you wrote:
Petar Nedyalkov wrote:
On
Marcus Boerger wrote:
It is just some decision that was taken that the newer OO stuff should be a
bit more strict.
I don't remember any such decision. I don't even remember a discussion
about it. I'm aware of the efforts of some people to make PHP less PHP
and more Java and thus we end up in
Hello Jochem,
Tuesday, April 25, 2006, 3:15:52 PM, you wrote:
> Petar Nedyalkov wrote:
>> On Tuesday 25 April 2006 14:30, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>I was wondering if someone could enlighten me why it is not possible to
>>>create on-the-fly static properties:
>>>
>>>php -r 'class f
Petar Nedyalkov wrote:
> This totally breaks the capsulation in the OO paradigm, so I find it the
> right
> behaviour.
This is PHP we're talking about. If you want 100% purist "capsulation"
according to "OO paradigm" you're clearly using the wrong language. Heck
even wrong language class.
What
Petar Nedyalkov wrote:
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 14:30, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering if someone could enlighten me why it is not possible to
create on-the-fly static properties:
php -r 'class foo{}; foo::$bar = 1;'
Fatal error: Access to undeclared static property: foo::$bar in
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 14:30, Edin Kadribasic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if someone could enlighten me why it is not possible to
> create on-the-fly static properties:
>
> php -r 'class foo{}; foo::$bar = 1;'
> Fatal error: Access to undeclared static property: foo::$bar in Command
> line
Hi,
I was wondering if someone could enlighten me why it is not possible to
create on-the-fly static properties:
php -r 'class foo{}; foo::$bar = 1;'
Fatal error: Access to undeclared static property: foo::$bar in Command
line code on line 1
Was this not possible because of the engine implement
16 matches
Mail list logo
