Re: Re: 'Simple' phpers idea about interfaces/code reuse [was] Re: [PHP-DEV]PHP 6.0 Wishlist

Marcus Boerger wrote:

Hello Christian, Thursday, August 25, 2005, 12:17:25 PM, you wrote:

Jochem Maas wrote:

I would see this as a optional addition to the syntax of interfaces... i.e. everything works as before but you can add default function bodies which would behave as if it was defined in each class that implements the given interface. if this is a truely evil concept I would very much appreciate a little heads up as to why :-)

One quick thing which comes to mind the the WTF-factor when you implement two different interfaces with two different base implementations. One of the cruxes of multiple inheritance.

There is no real problem here only probably naming confusion with the coder and all its classes. And of course the problem that later changes might lead to errors due to changes in order. That said there are two things about this: 1) why not offer static methods with bodies in interfaces that don't get inherited. 2) do not inherit any body from interfaces, thus you'd need to call them explicitly.

this would certainly cover my original thought/mindburp regarding code reuse with respect to simple/repeated interface implementation. at any rate MI is not something I'm looking for as a 'simple phper' :-) I might change my mind if and when I ever properly get to grips with a language like C++. I can also imagine that use of the $this keyword might be problematic ,if not from an internals POV, possible from a phper's POV rather like the scope of $this confuses people when calling static methods from inside non-static methods regardless, interesting times ahead for php... thanks for everything!

Thus our MI problems are still solved. The real MI problems are anyway related to virtual inheritance.... The question is, does this help us or is it only making things more complicated to understand? Best regards, Marcus