Stut wrote:
> Andrei wrote:
>> Hi list,
>>
>> I have a class which I use to parse simple bbcode inside some
>> comments.
>> I noticed on PHP5 that scope of preg_replace function is changed
>> when function is called inside a class. To the point:
>>
>> [CODE]
>> class PHS_editor
>> {
>>
Andrei wrote:
Hi list,
I have a class which I use to parse simple bbcode inside some comments.
I noticed on PHP5 that scope of preg_replace function is changed
when function is called inside a class. To the point:
[CODE]
class PHS_editor
{
...
function parse_content( $str =
I have never heard that described as a "fluent interface" before, but you'd
probably like jQuery. :-) It's a javascript library that uses much the same
concept, although it refers to it as "function chaining". It also operates
on multiple objects simultaneously, which is even niftier.
On Thur
a) I don't see how the part about the "dot notation" has anything to
do with the class presetned
b) I don't see any benefit to the class presented
c) Trying to follow the chain of -> operators and method calls just
gave me a headache.
Other than that, it's really nifty. :-v
On Thu, April 12, 20
nice write up. :-)
Tim Stiles wrote:
> I suppose I should have summarized what I learned from that experiment,
> putting myself more squarely on topic: Simply put, a Fluent interface
> let me move from
>
/snip
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www
I suppose I should have summarized what I learned from that
experiment, putting myself more squarely on topic: Simply put, a
Fluent interface let me move from
$_input->addCheck('Integer');
$_input->addCheck('Range',3,9);
$_input->addCheck('NonEmpty');
to
$_input->addCheck('Integer')
I've seen it referred to as a "Fluent Interface". I built one just
to see how hard it was, using a standard problem: data validation.
The results were promising.
I combined it with an object designed to work as a factory for an
internally stored decorator pattern.
Class Input was the fa
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2007-04-11 23:44:16 -0700:
> Paul Scott wrote:
> >On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 23:22 -0700, Jim Lucas wrote:
> >
> >>Has anybody else seen this style of syntax?
> >>
> >http://5ive.uwc.ac.za/index.php?module=blog&action=viewsingle&postid=init_8059_1163957717&userid=5729061010
> >
> >
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2007-04-11 23:36:56 -0700:
> Paul Scott wrote:
> >On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 23:22 -0700, Jim Lucas wrote:
> >>Has anybody else seen this style of syntax?
>
> >I don't think that its really useful for anything, except maybe creating
> >overly complex SQL queries.
>
> What about usi
Paul Scott wrote:
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 23:22 -0700, Jim Lucas wrote:
Has anybody else seen this style of syntax?
http://5ive.uwc.ac.za/index.php?module=blog&action=viewsingle&postid=init_8059_1163957717&userid=5729061010
I don't think that its really useful for anything, except maybe creati
Paul Scott wrote:
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 23:22 -0700, Jim Lucas wrote:
Has anybody else seen this style of syntax?
http://5ive.uwc.ac.za/index.php?module=blog&action=viewsingle&postid=init_8059_1163957717&userid=5729061010
I don't think that its really useful for anything, except maybe creati
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 23:22 -0700, Jim Lucas wrote:
> Has anybody else seen this style of syntax?
>
http://5ive.uwc.ac.za/index.php?module=blog&action=viewsingle&postid=init_8059_1163957717&userid=5729061010
I don't think that its really useful for anything, except maybe creating
overly complex
Ok, I have seen many different examples of OOP, but nothing quite like this.
Someone was showing me syntax for Ruby the other day, and it got me thinking, wouldn't it be neat to
imitate ruby, or be it a little more generic, dot notation for OOP ways of calling methods like
Java, javascript, rub
* Thus wrote Hardik Doshi:
> Hello Group,
>
> I would like to know which one is the most appropriate
> way to implement the following scenario.
>
> For example, I want to display a products catalogue of
> 100 products. I do have a base class of product which
> contains all the basic property of t
On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 19:29, Hardik Doshi wrote:
> Hello Group,
>
> I would like to know which one is the most appropriate
> way to implement the following scenario.
>
> For example, I want to display a products catalogue of
> 100 products. I do have a base class of product which
> contains all t
On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 22:29, Hardik Doshi wrote:
> Hello Group,
>
> I would like to know which one is the most appropriate
> way to implement the following scenario.
>
> For example, I want to display a products catalogue of
> 100 products. I do have a base class of product which
> contains all t
Hello Group,
I would like to know which one is the most appropriate
way to implement the following scenario.
For example, I want to display a products catalogue of
100 products. I do have a base class of product which
contains all the basic property of the product
(Product title, product descript
17 matches
Mail list logo
