Re: [SMARTY-DEV] objects: one more approach

It looks like we have views from both sides of the fence :-) $foo->bar("foo","bar"); vs. $foo->bar(array('p1' => "foo", 'p2' => $bar), $this); for the latter: PROS: * order of args in template don't matter * smarty object passed as parameter * key names maintained * complies with smarty function format CONS: * existing objects must be rewritten to smarty specs, or wrappered I can see where it would be nice to use existing objects with smarty without a lot of rework. Maybe we should figure out a way to handle both. A smarty var that globally determines how they are parsed? Or to handle each separately, have a special parameter: {$foo->bar p1="foo" p2="bar" wrapper=true} This would make the object compile as: $foo->bar("foo","bar"); On Wed, 2003-01-15 at 11:33, Nick Charsley wrote: > [..] > > > which should happen? > > > > > > $foo->bar("foo", $bar); > > > > > > or > > > > > > $foo->bar(array('p1' => "foo", 'p2' => $bar), > > > $this); > > > > i prefer the former, since it is the most flexible and existing > > object-api can be used that way. it would be great if the second could > > be registered as a special method also. > > > I too prefer the former, the main reason why is that most objects will have > been written to accept arguments in this way so if I have my fully working > and tested foo class I can just drop it into smarty and don't have to write > a new 'smartyBar($array,$this)' method that unpicks the arguments and then > calls $this->bar($p1,$p2). > If I'm exposing a lot of methods then I'm not sure I've gained anything, and > I've certainly lost the re-usability of my object. > > just my tupence worth > > Nick (c) -- Monte Ohrt <monte@ispi.net>