Re: PHP_Func

Although PEAR is supposted to be a class library, we did discuss this as part of the PHP_CompactInfo proposal.. - I do wonder if this should not be made available as part of PEAR PEAR::ensureFunction('file_get_contents'); function ensureFunction($name) { if (function_exists($name)) { return; } require_once 'PEAR/CompatFunctions/'.$name.'.php'; } .. the actual CompatFunctions could be in the PEAR_CompatFunctions package... i dont think getting clever and putting them in a class would be quite as predictable as just defining the function... Feel free to propose it.. ** I could really do with the clone one :) Regards Alan Aidan Lister wrote:

I was thinking to myself, why doesn't PEAR have a set of functions that everyone, for every project ends up rewriting? Surely that's what we're about here, reusability. include 'function.microtime_str.php'; // tell me you haven't recreated this function at least 100 times http://ircphp.com/users/imho/?file=function.microtime_str.php Then I was thinking, well, why stop there - why not introduce implementations of functions that are lacking in older versions of php - god knows the PHP Manual is full of them. For example, http://ircphp.com/users/imho/?file=function.scandir.php http://ircphp.com/users/imho/?file=function.file_get_contents.php http://ircphp.com/users/imho/?file=function.file_put_contents.php Then lsmith said "why not put them in a class", and immediately my brain started ticking. PHP_Func, a class for extending and replacing basic PHP functionality. All functions would be abstract, and called as such. eg. PHP_Func::file_get_contents(); In a PHP5 implementation, the __get method could be used for a factory pattern. Anyway, that's my idea... I'd love any feedback, whether people think it's a good idea, etc. Thanks, Aidan

-- Can you help out? Need Consulting Services or Know of a Job? http://www.akbkhome.com