At 09:40 13/08/2003, Brad Bulger wrote:
if an object calls one of its methods ($thing->foo()), any static-type
method calls made inside there - self::a(), parent::a(), fezbar::a() -
will have $this defined, pointing to original calling object.
self:: and parent:: are always relative to the contain
Hello Brad,
Wednesday, August 13, 2003, 9:51:23 AM, you wrote:
BB> i can't say. you want to be able to call parent::method() and have $this
BB> available there, for sure. it is not truly a static call, it is just syntax
BB> that looks like static, i think. (but for sure i don't know!) 'static'
BB
Marcus Börger wrote:
It is very simple:
uh oh. :)
If this is defined in a static method it is a language error. However when
mentioning this problem the acronym BC often gets used for what ever reason. I
mean the idea of the new OO model was to have OO in php at least, wasn't it ?
i can't say. yo
this is old subject everyone is tired of i'm sure. but since large changes
have been made to call_user_func[_array] recently, i want to confirm:
if an object calls one of its methods ($thing->foo()), any static-type
method calls made inside there - self::a(), parent::a(), fezbar::a() -
will have $
Hello Brad,
Wednesday, August 13, 2003, 8:40:37 AM, you wrote:
BB> this is old subject everyone is tired of i'm sure. but since large changes
BB> have been made to call_user_func[_array] recently, i want to confirm:
BB> if an object calls one of its methods ($thing->foo()), any static-type
BB>
semi-related: __call is somewhat reversed. it will catch
call_user_func(array('self','fake')), but not self::fake()
(same for parent vs parent:: or randomclass vs randomclass::)
the visibility of $this is not changed, so you end up with
no $this inside __call. it can be a surprise.
--
PHP Interna
