Re: Re: function call chaining

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Why would this imply "dropping" the object? >>> >>> This: >>>    $foo = (new bar())->someSetter(); >>> Looks a lot better than this >>>    $foo = new bar(); >>>    $foo->someSetter(); >> >> The second version is much clearer.  You know exactly what $foo is.  In >> the shortened version you have no idea what $foo is without reading the >> code for the someSetter() method.  On first glance I would assume that >> $foo would be the success/failure return of the setter and that the >> object is dropped. I also think that:  $foo = (new bar())->someSetter(); is assigning the return value of the setter to $foo. I would love to have a language feature like anonymous classes, but if $foo contains the bar-object after this line - wow, how would I hate this. From my understanding both examples should act differently. Rephrased: if one would say, the constructor returns itself as a object, you could call the someSetter() method on the returned object. The return value of someSetter() is then assigned. Having such a language feature could help with having that later: $a = new AbstractClass {    public function methodToOverride() {       // overriding code   } } i think this already works: $a = new MyObject(); $a->setListener( new MyListener() ); but this could then work too $a = new MyObject(); $a->setListener( new MyFactory()->createZipCreator() ); As said, I would love such a syntax feature cheers Christian