Re: [RFC] Invoke __callStatic when non-static public methods are called statically
| From: | 하늘아부지 | Date: | Sun, 31 Mar 2024 23:23:01 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Invoke __callStatic when non-static public methods are called statically | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-122840@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
2024년 4월 1일 (월) 오전 2:31, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>님이 작성:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2024, at 6:12 PM, 하늘아부지 wrote:
>
> >> It would be more accurate to say "calling non-static methods in a
> static-like manner is common *in Laravel*
> >
> > It might be correct to say that this is specific to Laravel. The
> > problem, however, is that Laravel is used so extensively that it cannot
> > be ignored.
>
> True, but as someone else noted, Laravel already has a workaround in place
> for this. WordPress is orders of magnitude more popular than Laravel, but
> we don't generally design the language to work "the WordPress way," because
> that is well-recognized as a not-good way to work.
>
> Popularity matters, but quality matters more.
>
> > There's a point of embarrassing me. It's as if my proposal, if
> > accepted, would create problems that did not previously exist. Yet, the
> > existence of
__callStatic already allows for the issues
> > you've
> > pointed out to occur. You can already write code like
> > foo::bar()::baz() with the current PHP. The possibility of
> > more
> > problems arising could indeed be true. In that sense, I understand your
> > point.
>
> To be clear: I have no interest or desire to embarrass you personally. I
> have never met you before so have no opinion about you one way or another,
> and trust the feeling is mutual. That you're interested in improving PHP
> is to your credit, and I thank you for that.
>
> However, that is separate from the proposal itself, which for reasons
> stated I think is not a good one. That should not reflect on you
> personally in any way, and is explicitly not intended as such. Certainly
> I've had enough of my proposals rejected around here. :-)
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
I understand.
I didn't assume my proposal would be accepted without question. I just
started because I hate doing nothing.
Daddyofsky