On May 15, 2006, at 7:53 PM, Richard Lynch wrote:
You can't do that.
Yeah I can, sorta. Well not really as I'm having to pass a reference
to the class object around. But that works.
The whold class has to be in a single contiguous file.
Last I checked.
To be able to use $this-> in th
You can't do that.
The whold class has to be in a single contiguous file.
Last I checked.
On the plus side, it's incredibly unlikely that having the functions
in separate files was a Good Idea...
On Fri, May 12, 2006 12:34 pm, Edward Vermillion wrote:
> I'm doing some re-writing of a huge class
On May 12, 2006, at 1:55 PM, Stut wrote:
Edward Vermillion wrote:
But my thought is that since the include was from inside the
member function that the included function would be in the scope
of the member function, and not global. (?)
So if I have:
class foo {
function bar()
{
2006/5/12, Edward Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On May 12, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Martin Alterisio wrote:
class foo {
function bar()
{
function baz(){}
}
}
baz() will be a global function there.
There are other ways to add member functions at runtime bu
Edward Vermillion wrote:
But my thought is that since the include was from inside the member
function that the included function would be in the scope of the member
function, and not global. (?)
So if I have:
class foo {
function bar()
{
function baz(){}
}
}
Would baz()
On May 12, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Martin Alterisio wrote:
[snip]
When you call a function in the global scope from inside a member
function you're leaving the object scope, that's why this is null
in the global function
But my thought is that since the include was from inside the member
fu
2006/5/12, Edward Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I'm doing some re-writing of a huge class I've got (don't think OOP
cause it's really not, just the usual class full of functions). What
I'm doing is moving the functions out of the class and into separate
files so the (I'm hoping) memory footpri
7 matches
Mail list logo
