Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Add WHATWG compliant URL parsing API
| From: | Bilge | Date: | Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:52:37 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Add WHATWG compliant URL parsing API | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-124029@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 29/06/2024 10:31, Stephen Reay wrote:
No objection. I was only kidding :) Cheers, BilgeOn 29 Jun 2024, at 06:03, Bilge<bilge@scriptfusion.com> wrote: On 28/06/2024 22:35, Niels Dossche wrote:I would argue that for 90%+ of cases, static *userland* classes are used because of (a) autoloading and (b) the ability to use private/protected methods. Neither of those apply to a php extension. I agree with the others, the static parser class is weird. Either put the static methods on the url class, or make the parser an instance with options.- Why did you choose UrlParser to be a "static" class?Because "static class" is the hip new cool ;) Bilge