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

Hi Marcus, I like parent::foo() mach more then parent->foo() and mach-mach more then $this->parent::foo(). Marcus, could you please explain why do you like to change syntax? Are you looking from ZE or SPL side? :) (I just saw that your latest patches were releated to static methods). Thanks. Dmitry. > -----Original Message----- > From: Marcus Boerger [mailto:helly@php.net] > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 10:28 PM > To: Andi Gutmans; Sebastian Bergmann > Cc: internals@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Static vs. non static > > > Hello Andi, Sebastian, > > Monday, January 23, 2006, 9:25:29 AM, Sebastian wrote: > > > Lukas Smith schrieb: > >> If I get Marcus proposal properly he would then allow > changing things > >> from: > >> parent::method(); > >> > >> to > >> > >> parent->method(); > > > If that is the case, then it would be consistent to allow > > > this->method() > > this->attribute > > parent->attribute > > parent->method() would work > attributes are more than discussable and i don'T think we > need anything more than $this->attibute for dynamic > attibutes. And since you cannot overload protected or public > attibutes or hide base class attibutes there is no need to > provide a means of skipping hierarchy levels. > > If i was very pedantic i'd not propose 'baseclass->method()' > but the formal correct '$this->baseclass::method()'. However > i see the former as a very handy and clear shortcut. Another > reason to go with the shortcut is that once we'd allow > '$this->baseclass::method()' people would start to ask for > '$obj->classname::method()' which is at somepoints usefull > but is not exactly the KISS approach. > > Best regards, > Marcus > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > >