Re: [PEPr] Comment on PEAR::PEAR_Delegator
| From: | lingwitt at bellsouth dot net | Date: | Fri, 25 Feb 2005 23:06:39 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PEPr] Comment on PEAR::PEAR_Delegator | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-36390@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Alright. Checkout the new code and documentation, thanks.
On 23 Feb 2005, at 17:32, Stephan Schmidt wrote:
Hi, lingwitt@bellsouth.net schrieb:I have updated the source, though the only breeches of standards I found were with curly braces. Let me know if I missed something.That's basically what I found as well. So this should be OK now.I extend PEAR because there is no multiple inheritance. People would probably want to have a PEAR class as well as a delegator. Besides, it's logically pleasing to have one pure root class.Why would one want to extend PEAR? There are mainly two reasons: 1. Error Handling 2. No Destructors in PHP4 The first can be done using excepions or PEAR_ErrorStack (which is a lot more flexible) and the second is available in PHP5. I think, a lot of people will not use you package, if it's extending PEAR. Please think about this subject prior to your first release and take a look at the error handling RFC (http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=132) which defines that PHP5-only packages should use PEAR_Exception instead of PEAR_Error.