Re: RFC: Anonymous Classes

On 27 September 2013 09:55, Nicolas Grekas <nicolas.grekas+php@gmail.com> wrote: > If you need access to the methods in AProxifier then why does the anonymous >> class extend A, you should extend AProxifier as you would with any other >> class. >> > > Because A has the behavior I want to extend? > > An other example: > > class A {...} > class B {...} > > class Factory > { > protected function protectedMethod() {...} > > function getA() > { > return new class extends A {.. call Factory::protectedMethod()? ..}; > } > > function getB() > { > return new class extends B {.. call Factory::protectedMethod()? ..}; > } > } > > This is possible and welcomed with closures. > I see it as useful for anonymous classes than it is for anonymous functions. > What do others you think about it? -1 Just because a closure is an anonymous function does not mean that an anonymous class has closure capabilites. -- Regards, Mike