Seems like I missed that whole thread. I don't quite understand what we have to gain from dissallowing overriding static methods and/or abstract static methods. It's not really in the PHP spirit. Making it E_STRICT doesn't solve the situation because it will tell people it's not an ok thing to do, and I'm not quite sure that's what we want. Can we revert to 5.1 status quo and get 5.2 shipped and discuss this? Shipping it like this and then reverting later will just create a huge headache and will confuse our user-base.
Btw, I don't quite understand why it doesn't make sense? Maybe people are not used to it from other OO langauges but the "no sense" argument isn't very convincing. I actually see it as a way to enforce a contract or structure. Some might not agree with it but I don't see how it violates any rules of the universe... Andi > -----Original Message----- > From: Derick Rethans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 1:11 AM > To: Andi Gutmans > Cc: 'Dmitry Stogov'; 'Ilia Alshanetsky'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ZEND-ENGINE-CVS] cvs: ZendEngine2(PHP_5_2) / > zend_compile.c > > On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Andi Gutmans wrote: > > > I cant remember the discussion we had in the past. > > Why is it important to not allow overriding of static functions? We > > can/should probably enforce the same contract of course. > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=116129338300001&r=1&w=2 > and > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=114734986200004&r=1&w=2 > > regards, > Derick > > -- > Zend Engine CVS Mailing List (http://cvs.php.net/) To > unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
