Re: [PEPr] +1 for Authentication::OpenID
| From: | Josh Hoyt | Date: | Thu, 09 Feb 2006 17:26:02 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PEPr] +1 for Authentication::OpenID | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-41269@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
One more question:
On 9 Feb 2006 09:22:16 -0000, Markus Tacker <m@tacker.org> wrote:
> * Implementing functions as methods
Should we just create an arbitrary class (like Auth_OpenID) and dump
all of the functions in it? The functions that we have that are not
methods are not related to each other and do not naturally go in a
particular class.
For example should:
function Auth_OpenID_saneTrustRoot(...)
{
...
}
be converted to:
class Auth_OpenID_TrustRoot {
/**
* @static
*/
function isSane(...)
{
...
}
}
or:
class Auth_OpenID {
/**
* @static
*/
function saneTrustRoot(...)
{
...
}
}
I don't know if this is even debatable, but I always feel uneasy about
a class that will never be instantiated. It seems like asking for
trouble. (What would it mean if someone instantiated it? I know the
answer is "don't do that", but making it a function instead of a
static method makes it so you *can't* do that.)
Josh