Re: [ZEND-ENGINE-CVS] cvs: ZendEngine2 / zend_compile.c php-src/tests/classes ctor_in_interface_01.phpt ctor_in_interface_02.phpt
ctor_in_interface_03.phpt ctor_in_interface_04.phpt interface_construct.phpt

From: Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:53:46 +0000
Subject: Re: [ZEND-ENGINE-CVS] cvs: ZendEngine2 / zend_compile.c php-src/tests/classes ctor_in_interface_01.phpt ctor_in_interface_02.phpt
ctor_in_interface_03.phpt ctor_in_interface_04.phpt interface_construct.phpt
References: 1 2  Groups: php.zend-engine.cvs 
Request: Send a blank email to php-zend-engine-cvs+get-4680@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
Hello Dmitry, Monday, March 6, 2006, 8:29:50 AM, you wrote: > Hi Marcus, > Is it your answer to my "break label" patch? :( Well that would be funny or childish even :-) > I didn't see final PDM's decision about constructor in interfaces. > And I didn't see any discussion about this, however may be I missed it. It was discussed once more on IRC and thus i simply put it here. Since it is a one line patch it can easily be dropped out again if there's a majority of people who are against this. > The question about constructors in interfaces is not simple, and both points > of view make sense. > So I would like to see your and others arguments? To me this makes perfect sense becuase there is no other way of enforcing a signature for class constructors. On one hand this is good because as we discussed a while back constructors should not have to inherit the signature. However having a way to reenforce this allows to write dynamic factories and stuff alike where a certain signature is important. Best regards, Marcus

« previous php.zend-engine.cvs (#4680) next »