Re: Re: static call bugs?
| From: | Andi Gutmans | Date: | Sat, 10 Mar 2001 00:38:25 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: static call bugs? | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-48479@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
At 01:30 AM 3/10/2001 +0100, André Langhorst wrote:
I still don't understand what the problem is? What should be documented is the right way to use these calls.There are no static functions in PHP. This syntax is used to call a method of the parent. It can be used to call other methods and thus haveparent::foo(); If you remember, it has been implemented *after* [classname]::[functionname]() ...
PEAR relies on the $this being correct even when you call a method which is not in the current class or in one of its parent classes?the wrong $this but I wouldn't document it.can't this be fixed, otherwise if I start documenting :: (however you want to call it), I cannot leave it out and since PEAR uses it heavily it has to be documented
Where can I see the documentation? (Any chance you can send it here to save me the time? :). We just need to be sure we don't document things which aren't necessarily supposed to work. AndiIn general, I think it's a bad idea to document undocumented features because some of them aren't meant for people to use. The behavior might change in the future.it's just three features "references inside constructor" (already commited), :: (the magical operator ;) ) and php_ticks