RE: [PHP-DEV] Static vs. non static

Thanks for pointing that out. I confused the earlier CVS commit with this change. At 11:12 PM 1/22/2006, Dmitry Stogov wrote:

Andi, Marcus didn't commit this patch. BTW: I am glad with existing syntax and semantic and don't see any reason to change them. They are simular to other programming languages. Thanks. Dmitry. -----Original Message----- From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:andi@zend.com] Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 6:00 AM To: Marcus Boerger; internals@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Static vs. non static Yes, this was by design. Via class it should be ::method() and via object it should be ->method(). Why do you think this is wrong? I think it actually makes a lot of sense and don't see what we gain from allowing to call self->method(). If there's a good reason, I'd be open to it though. And please next time give people a chance to reply to your email, especially on a weekend, before commiting a patch. Why do you send an email if you don't want to hear an answer? Andi At 10:32 AM 1/22/2006, Marcus Boerger wrote:

Hello internals, right now we allow 'class::method()' like syntax but not 'class->method() like. If noone comes up with a valid reason

why i am

forced to call a parents method using static syntax i'll commit the little required change. We could even add an E_STRICT when the old syntax is used where not applicable. But right now i don't see that message as neccessary unless people want to disallow misuse

of the old

synatx any time later. Best regards, Marcus -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php