Re: [PATCH] Late Static Binding

Zeev Suraski wrote:

At 16:50 01/03/2006, Lukas Smith wrote:

Dmitry Stogov wrote:

1) I would very like to see some real example where "static" is necessary?

I think Mike illustrated this in his post. Or do you want a "real" world example?

2) "static" is really bad name. I suggest "caller", Marcus thought about "class".

I dont really see an issue with calling the thing "static" considering its about late static binding. Also AFAIK this name was agreed upong in Paris. A meeting you also attended.

I actually don't recall there was consensus on even adding this feature in the Paris meeting, let alone how to name it.

but there is a problem no? as illustrated by: http://blog.joshuaeichorn.com/archives/2006/01/09/zactiverecord-cant-work/ I ran into this problem with Ard Biesheuvel with php5beta3. he considered the fact that 'self' didn't resolve to the actual class being called a flaw, I argee with him.

Either way, implementation wise, as Dmitry said - storing runtime information in zend_function or zend_op_array is simply out of the question.

do you agree that 'a' feature is needed to satisfy the illustrated problem(s)? kind regards, Jochem {simpletons idea ...} rather than an alternative form of static method calling or a new class related keyword, maybe a new magic constant would be sufficient? e.g. __CCLASS__ (C for 'Called') or __OWNER__ (the class the 'owns' the method? [from the view point of the caller])

Zeev