Re: Reflection API RFC

On Tue, 08 Apr 2003, Tomica Jovanovic wrote: > First of all, why isn't InterfaceType base class for ClassType, since, > in fact, class _is_ an interface, and every method of InterfaceType is > in fact present in the ClassType (except for the getParentInterface() > which is named getParentClass in ClassType, but could easily be named > getParent in both classes, or the getParentInterface() could be > "non-virtual" in the InterfaceType class...) True. I'll think about having ClassTypep inherit from InterfaceType. > Second, why aren't some of the methods from ClassType available in the > InterfaceType, when they are clearly valid there. Some of them include: > > class InterfaceType { > > // same as ClassType::getInterfaces() > // but not sure about this one.. didn't really understand if > // Interface can "implement", or extend more than one > // Interface... (and BTW, if they cant, they should ;) > function getInterfaces(); Doesn't make sense. An interface can extend only one interface. > // same as ClassType::hasInterface($name) > // look the note in the previous method > function hasInterface($name); See above. > // same as ClassType::getModifiers() > // the RFC states "currently only ABSTRACT" which doesn't apply > // to Interfaces, but might be usable later when/if more > // modifiers are added > function getModifiers(); Interfaces don't have any modifiers. > // same as ClassType::isInstanceOf() > // but with a slightly different meaning. it would return if $obj is > // an instance of a Class that implements this Interface (and > // thus, can safely be looked at as an "instance" of this Interface) > function isInstanceOf($obj); I guess this would be nice. -Andrei http://www.gravitonic.com/ If you find a job that you love, you'll never work another day in your life. - Mark Jackson