RE: [SMARTY-DEV] more abstraction committed

From: Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 15:27:33 +0000
Subject: RE: [SMARTY-DEV] more abstraction committed
References: 1  Groups: php.smarty.dev 
Request: Send a blank email to php-smarty-dev+get-1434@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
-- Monte Wrote: > On another note, as a consequence of abstracting I also reorganized > the function arguments to be more like Smarty plugins, so instead of: > funcname($foo1,$foo2,$foo3) > > we now have: > > funcname($params, &$smarty) > > Where $params is an associative array containing $foo1, $foo2, $foo3. > Thich makes things easier to maintain and expand. Would it be possible to start using the convention of having $smarty passed as the first parameter to the function? That should really make it easier to extend things in the future and no one would have to guess which parameter position to pass $this into. I've been thinking about the abstraction and I expect that this work is still highly experimental, correct? Asides from Andrei's comments, I'm not really sure how this counts as abstraction. Its more modularization down to the function level, which is somewhat strange. How does one extend/modify Smarty using this new regime? I think there will be a lot of mechanics and a lot of data-driven lookups. It looks like there is a new function that is dealing with the "abstracted" pieces. Perhaps some profiling code should be placed in there. One interesting consequence of this is that if Smarty is reduced completely to modularized functions, then the compiled templates can include just enough functions to get the page processed. That is very interesting. In my mind, there are still advantages to using static classes and interfaces, yet I am really intrigued as to where Monte's direction will take things. I love the idea of static classes interfaces because it would allow all of the data to be quickly passed around and to also maintain multiple states of the engine concurrently. It also means a uniform way of passing parameters and other data while still having access to "local" class members (as I discussed with Monte, I'm thinking of Decorators to achieve that). I realize that it depends on some class features--PHP4's weakest feature, so it may not be tenable from a practical point of view. xo boots ps. Monte: Vegas, eh? Ahhh, the bright lights and late nights. Try not to lose as much money there as I do ;) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

« previous php.smarty.dev (#1434) next »