Re: php5 class initialization

From: Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 10:03:53 +0000
Subject: Re: php5 class initialization
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to internals+get-8746@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
RL>> But we are getting way off the real point which is the question of whether RL>> you should be allowed to call what I suppose is now the deprecated RL>> constructor directly or not. I don't see a good reason why it wouldn't be I don't see any reason to allow two constructors for a class to exist in the first place, so the question of calling is not that relevant for me. RL>> treated like a normal method in every way. In a few years when people who RL>> have never seen PHP4 happen to create a method with the same name as the RL>> class would get very confused if it didn't work I would think. If it's documented as "constructed can be specified in two forms: 1. ClassName() 2. __construct() " then I see no problem that anyone who is good enough to understand what "<?" means to understand that either. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.109

« previous php.internals (#8746) next »