Re: What's wrong the __autoload()?
| From: | Richard Heyes | Date: | Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:08:27 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: What's wrong the __autoload()? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-271404@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Greg Donald wrote:
On 3/12/08, Richard Heyes <richardh@phpguru.org> wrote:I agree. But having worked in the (then) fast paced environment of online DVD rental, time was not available.That's not quite the situation. Finding good developers isn't easy, so lots of companies will go for "acceptable" ones, who are less likely to know of __autoloads existence. Hence, using __autoload is unwise.A lesser developer should be paid less and should be expected to produce less but he should not in any way be allowed to refrain from learning.
How long does it take to understand __autoload() anyway? 5-10 minutes?I would say as long as it takes to read the manual page, which isn't that long at all.
You're gonna restrict the entire development team from using a given feature just because you don't want to invest 20 minutes in getting your newbie developer up to spead? That's pure idiocy.No it's not. It's not like require_once() is a hassle to type/use anyhow. Things like editor macros and templates help out enormously and by using them over __auto load you (a business) could save yourself a lot of time and hence money. -- Richard Heyes Employ me: http://www.phpguru.org/cv