Re: Use of 'self' in static function in subclass

It's something I noticed, too. Consider this: class A { function a() { return $this::b(); } function b() { return 1; } } class B extends A { function b() { return 2; } } If I call $b = new B(); echo $b->a(); No matter what combination of this, self, parent, ... - I could never get B's property. I was led to believe that this is actually normal for OO designs (is it? If so, ignore me). But it would be awesome if self or $this (ONLY one of them, if they currently perform the same function) actually referred to the top class - ie. B::b() in this case. Is this what this suggestion would suggest? Thanks, Jevon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Bregenzer" <adam@bregenzer.net> To: "Hans Lellelid" <hans@velum.net> Cc: "Ferdinand Beyer" <fb@fbeyer.com>; "Timm Friebe" <thekid@thekid.de>; <internals@lists.php.net> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 12:26 PM Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Use of 'self' in static function in subclass > On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 19:53, Hans Lellelid wrote: > > Yeah +1 on self:: binding at runtime. I can't really imagine a case > > where you would want to refer to 'self' as the class that contains the > > method *and not* the overridden method in invoked class (if it exists). > > Binding this at runtime will introduce many new design possibilities > > with static classes and will also make self:: consistent with $this-> > > behavior for objects. > > +1, I agree completely. I think it is critical to have a way to be able > to have a static method call another static method in the same class > that respects inheritance. If a developer wanted a call to not respect > inheritance the class's name can be used instead of self with the same > results (increased code maintenance should the class name change > notwithstanding). > > -- > Adam Bregenzer > adam@bregenzer.net > http://adam.bregenzer.net/ > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >