Re: LSB forward_static_call()
| From: | Lars Strojny | Date: | Sun, 22 Jun 2008 20:03:19 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: LSB forward_static_call() | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-38515@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi Etienne,
Am Freitag, den 20.06.2008, 18:04 +0200 schrieb Etienne Kneuss:
[...]
> 2) parent:: carries the info while ParentClassName:: doesn't
> + convenient
> + no functionnality lost
> - introduces a difference between parent:: and classname::, but
> restricted to LSB so no BC break
Thanks for bringing this on topic again. I would like to see 2)
implemented, as the current behaviour looks unpredictable to strangers.
Stas, you argued, that non-forward static calls would no longer be
possible? Doesn't the con argument in Etiennes list solve that issue or
do I miss something? If you want non-forwarding calls, use
<classname>::method()?
cu, Lars
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil signature.asc
Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil signature.asc