At 12:46 10/04/2002 -0700, brad lafountain wrote: >--- Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey guys, > > > > I still haven't finished reading the looooooong thread on aggregation vs. > > MI because you guys write so much :) > > I would like to make a proposal for a solution which I think would fit PHP > > very nicely. > > My main concern with MI is that there are many problems with it including > > namespace clashes and other problems most of you are probably familiar > > with. I think trying to work around and find solutions for all of these > > would make a PHP implementation of MI extremely hard to use and would move > > away from the spirit of PHP which is powerful simplicity. > > What I have in mind is something similar to aggregation (in the original > > C++ sense which means a "has a" relationship) but improve it with an > > auto-proxy mechanism. > > Basically what I'd like to have is something like: > > > > class a aggregates b, c { > > ... > > } > > I did suggest this method already. >But it really doesn't address the naming clash > >class b >{ > function print() > { > } >} > >class c >{ > function print() > { > } >} > >class a aggregates b, c >{ >} >$a = new A(); > >$a->print(); >you said in the order they were aggregated. but what if i really want to call >c->print(); > >would i do something like this. >$a->c->print();
By the way, the aggregating class could also define it's own proxy a_print() and c_print() methods. I don't think it's very important because it will usually not happen and is easy to solve if it happens. With MI this kind of stuff stinks too. Andi -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php