I think the point was that if somebody wants to extend one another class,
maybe one of the SPL classes for example, they can't also extend the base
class with getter/setter support so it's an incomplete solution that will
frustrate many users.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Richard Quadling <rquadl...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 3 June 2013 17:55, Nikita Popov <nikita....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Richard Quadling <rquadl...@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi.
> >>
> >> Recently the setters/getters rfc was declined.
> >>
> >> Other than the vote, was there any technical reasons?
> >>
> >> I've been sitting here and had a thought.
> >>
> >> Currently, if I use ...
> >>
> >> <?php
> >> class some_base_class {}
> >> ?>
> >>
> >> I can, sort of, think of this as ...
> >>
> >> <?php
> >> class some_base_class extends \stdClass {}
> >> ?>
> >>
> >> in as much as \stdClass has no constants, properties or methods. In
> fact,
> >> no behaviour at all.
> >>
> >> Now, could it be possible that I could have another PHP maintained base
> >> class or interface that DID support setters/getters?
> >>
> >> So, I would have to make the decision at develop time ...
> >>
> >> <?php
> >> class some_base_class extends \stdClassThatHasSetterGetterSupport {}
> >> ?>
> >>
> >> sort of thing.
> >>
> >> So, for classes NOT extending \stdClassThatHasSetterGetterSupport, the
> >> variable/property handling to be used is the original style.
> >>
> >> But for those base classes that do extend from
> >> \stdClassThatHasSetterGetterSupport, then these would have property
> >> support.
> >>
> >>
> >> Is this even possible/feasible?
> >>
> >> Whilst the vote went against the initial rfc, I'm happy to accept that
> >> (though I wish it had passed as I like the black boxing and the semantic
> >> cleanliness it would provide - IMHO).
> >>
> >>
> >> To me, if the internals operated as ...
> >>
> >> <?php
> >> class \stdClassThatHasSetterGetterSupport extends \stdClass {}
> >> ?>
> >>
> >> add if that was enough to enable setters/getters, then COULD this be a
> way
> >> forward for PHP supporting new functionality without breaking base
> >> functionality?
> >>
> >> In essence, turning PHP's internals into a sort of OOP framework.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Richard.
> >>
> >
> > PHP does not support multiple inheritance. So no, this doesn't solve
> > really the issue.
> >
> > Nikita
> >
>
>
> I'm not talking about multiple inheritance, but of extension.
>
> A new internal PHP base class which internally extends from stdClass, but
> is a class that provides additional functionality, specifically
> setter/getter logic.
>
> So, from userland, I can not extend and get the current stdClass, or I can
> choose \stdClassThatHasSetterGetterSupport and get that.
>
> And if I so wish, I can implement
> SomeOtherPHPSuppliedIterfaceLikeIteratorOrWhatever.
>
> Richard.
>
> --
> Richard Quadling
> Twitter : @RQuadling
> EE : http://e-e.com/M_248814.html
> Zend : http://bit.ly/9O8vFY
>
--
*Brandon Wamboldt*
Software Engineer
Resume/CV <http://brandonwamboldt.com/cv/> - Personal
Site/Blog<http://brandonwamboldt.ca/>
- LinkedIn <http://ca.linkedin.com/in/brandonwamboldt> - StackOverflow
Careers Profile <http://careers.stackoverflow.com/brandonwamboldt> - GitHub
Profile <https://github.com/brandonwamboldt>
