Re: protected __call() question

Jochem Maas wrote:

I'm happy to just remove the P and add it again if ever that becomes an option.

Or go for the simpler option: Just don't use P. An addition to the documentation of __call saying that it has to be public makes sense though. The meaning of PPP on __call would be confusing anyway: Does it mean the implementation of __call or the visibility of the 'virtual' functions being called. I'd assume the first but people _will_ get confused. And I think __call has such few uses (I can think of one class right now: Object proxies for SOAP/ XMLRPC or the like) that you will hardly redeclare it anyway. If you start using __call on a regular basis you should probably rethink your design :-) - Chris