Re: Re: RFC: Implementing a core anti-XSS escaping class

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Sebastian Krebs <krebs.seb@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 2012/9/19 Tomas Creemers <tomas.creemers@gmail.com> >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> If this is going to be implemented as a class, what is the advantage >> of instantiation for this? Unless I'm missing it, I would propose that >> the functions are made static. >> [snip] >> >> Regards, >> >> Tomas > > > Hi, > > I guess the reason is the same like the one, why you just should avoid > static methods at all. But only one example: Try to extend the class and > then _always_ use the extended one ;) > > Regards, > Sebastian Isn't that what late static binding is for? It enables the use of the extending class (if any) from the base class. I really don't see what class instantiation would add to this design (if it's going to be a class at all). It doesn't have instance-specific state. Regards, Tomas