Re: Flamewar Summary

>> Sebastian Bergmann wrote: >>>> Addition of support for dynamic statics ala: class foo {} >>>> foo::$bar = 1; On Wed, May 17, 2006 2:03 pm, Marcus Boerger wrote: > there is a technical issue besides slowdown. We have to work around > the > fact that suddenly a function might get $this as a normal variable > (remember > the examples give on this list included that). Right now $this is > handled by > a special zval not stored in the local or global symol table bit > EG(this). > This will become a major maintanance hell. Also allowing $this as > normal > variable again will confuse people because suddenly after 5.1 they are > under some circumstances suddenly able to change $this. That said, we > will > also get a bunch of new bug reports, but who cares, it's the others > dealing > with them. And all for what? to refuse using globals as they are to > php'isch? or to use an array in a declared sttaic variable as that can > already be done and is also far to php'ish? I'm not sure it helps, or even if I understand the problem, but perhaps... A reasonable compromise might be that only scalars could be used for a late-binding static foo::$bar = VALUE; Similar to what is (used to be?) allow for variable initialization within a class definition. Or, perhaps, scalars and arrays of scalars allowed, but NO OBJECTS. It seems like the majority of people who find this late-binding static stuff useful are not really wanting to cram instance references, much less $this into there... This presumes that whatever was done for class property initialization could be readily repeated at the junction of an assignment to a static property, which might be a completely incorrect assumption. This is also post-vote, which might render it meaningless, which is fine -- just an idea if the vote is inconclusive or turns out to be void. -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm