Re: [Fwd: Re: [PHP] php 5 interfaces]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:56:55 +0100 Jochem Maas <jochem@iamjochem.com> wrote: > Tbird switched the reply and reply-all buttons again ;-)... > > > ?> > > IMHO its normally to use access type for methods declaration in interfaces. Why not? > > Maybe my first example was not sufficiently illustrative. But my question was "why it > > does not work in one environment and work fine in another". > > it worked for a while because it was originally overlooked, then they > 'fixed' it. -- you may not agree with the devs. > > > The problem has acquired when i try to add "static" in my interface definition. > > I don't think that this is a bug in PHP. > > I just want to be deep insight in OOP of PHP5 engine. > > > > your right, its not a bug - although some have argued that its Sucks(tm). > > in short it was decided by the devs that interfaces are not meant for > static classes, they only apply to objects - which is why 'static' is > not (no longer) allowed on interface methods. if you want to know more > then digging into the php internals mailing list archives will give you > long discussions and justifications as to why it works they way it does. > > if you think about it you can see where they are coming from: passing > around classes (i.e. classNames) and then checking whether said class > implements something is really odd, instead you pass around objects. > > or more simply: > > class == blueprint > object == house > > you can interface with a house (lets hope your house IMPLEMENTS a door > interface!) but you can't interface with a blueprint (possibly with the > piece of paper it may be printed on but not with the actual blueprint) > because the blueprint is an idea/concept. > > hope that helps you to understand the rationale. Thanks. This really helped me to understand php developer's way of thinking. > rgds, > JOchem > > > > > ... > > > > > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > -- RE5PECT Sergio Gorelyshev