Re: why don't most classes extend PEAR?
| From: | Tomas V.V.Cox | Date: | Thu, 06 Sep 2001 23:35:03 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: why don't most classes extend PEAR? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-1832@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
greg keraunen wrote:
>
> "Tomas V.V.Cox" wrote:
> >
>
> I like the idea of basic standards with little overhead that will get
> extended widely. If people are avoiding extending PEAR because of
> overhead then maybe there is a need for a simpler base class that just
> does runtime dependency checking between classes or something.
One of the things that Pear needs is something like a database of
installed packages. With it, it should be easy to do such things. There
is some code written at php4/pear/PEAR/Packlist.php.
> In my case, I'm avoiding extending PEAR for now because I don't have
> control over php installion on my hosted site and can't run pearize or
> dl(PEAR.so).
>
> I think whatever standards are most important should be easy to install
> for someone without root permissions on a run of the mill hosted php
> installation that might be behind the curve in maintenance.
Uh? You need to extend your class from PEAR.php (located at
php4/pear/PEAR.php). It's a php class that doesn't need any more than be
in your include path :-)
Tomas V.V.Cox