Re: PHP 4.0 Bug #5343: a way of implementing class methods

From:	waldschrott	Date:	Mon, 03 Jul 2000 15:22:54 +0000
Subject:	Re: PHP 4.0 Bug #5343: a way of implementing class methods
References:	1	Groups:	php.dev
Request:	Send a blank email to php-dev+get-23329@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message

<bulk including="a very descriptive example"> I think they´re (almost) well designed, but to make code more readable, I grouped several classes, easier (and faster) would be if there would be ANY way to equip classes. Require()/include() is not possible, the last enhancement report you´ve commented (class:newmethod()...)won´t be realized too, then I don´t see there any better solution. Say you´ve some functions in your own function library, they´re created for use in classes. The only way to equip some classes with these functions is to copy&paste the code into the class definition. It´s not possible to add methods later and it´s not possible to require()/include() anything inside the class definition. Sure you could pack them into a helper_functions_class and create new instances from inside the classes that need equipment and then you could pass the object itself ($this) to the helper_functions_class to gain access to the originating class, but I don´t think that´s the fine way. I could also create a helper_class in the originating constructor and map it to $this->helper=new helper_functions_class(); to avoid creating the same instance multiple times. </bulk> Ok. maybe I´m wrong, thus have a look on this: <example> Ability pool: sword_fighting,boxing,cloaking,lock_picking,be_feared Heroes: warrior,thief,amateur_thief First I need a generic hero: class hero { function boxing() {} } class warrior extends hero { function sword_fighting() {} } class thief extends hero { function cloaking() {} function lock_picking() {} } class amateur_thief extends hero { function lock_picking() {} function be_feared() {} } Thus you see I´ve written the method lock_picking() two time, so I could create a basic_thief_class, what would make code overall smaller and avoid redundancies... class basic_thief extends hero { function lock_picking() {} } class thief extends basic_thief { function cloaking() {} } class amateur_thief extends basic_thief { function be_feared() {}} </example> Now please don´t tell me that I´m totally wrong in any point... :) regards Jouni Ahto wrote:

On Sun, 2 Jul 2000, waldschrott wrote: It´s sometimes needed to equip classes with some standard methods and making class X a subclass of Y of Z of A of B is not the fine way ;) I've got a hunch that your class hierarchy isn't designed the right way. Although, I'm not very object oriented. Unless that object is something I can either eat or drink. :) -- Jouni Ahto