i really agree with brad.
actually,
im the kind of person that would like php to turn into java while still
having the php look and feel.
i did a few courses of java my employer send me to and i really appreciate
OO now that i got a taste of it.
because of these courses i started programingen OO in php, as much as this
is possible and soon stumbled across al of php's short commings on this
subject :(
i don't think it will have any negative effects on php implementing more OO
stuff.
lots of people out there don't even know what it is and they will code just
as happily as they were before.
still you could say that those people would have problems reading other
peoples code because it would be OO written,
but than again,
already lots of code is being written in php in an OO way so one could say
that OO shouldn't have been implemented, however simple, in the first place
as it has been.
but the php devolopers did.....
so,
in holland we have a saying:
"who says A must say B" ;)
in other words,
if you give people a taste of the goodies they'll be banging on your door
for more in no time...
so here i am ;)
At 10:26 6-6-2002 -0700, brad lafountain wrote:
>--- Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At 07:01 PM 6/6/2002, brad lafountain wrote:
> > >Please don't reply to this email saying Use Java... Because php is
> different
> > >than java and always will be even with these new features.
> >
> > Brad, I beg you, there's nothing anybody can say on this list that would
> > lead this to closure. Nothing. I believe that adding the things you
> > mentioned does indeed turn PHP into Java, just a messy Java, Java which is
> > worse at being Java than the real one is, and torn apart when compared
> > against it.
>
> Why do you think it would be messy.
>
> > Many others feel the same way. You don't think that way, and
> > I respect it, and there are also others who feel the same way too. If
> you,
> > or others, want to take PHP into that direction - non-web-centric, more
> > complicated language - it's your right, and you can do it outside the
> scope
> > of PHP (or fork). I believe it's a bad thing for PHP (both having these
> > patches in general and forking), but you don't necessarily share this
> belief.
>
> I do believe that making a "fork" or patches for php is a bad thing. It
> would
>lead into a big mess. But at the same time i believe more strongly that cs
>is a
>good thing, types are a good thing and stronger oo support is a good thing. To
>me these are more important.
>
> > There's one thing that is clear to me - there's no way to 'find a
> > solution', because we don't, at all, agree about the existence of the
> > problem. If you believe these features belong in PHP and that it should
> > import all (or most) of Java's features, we (and many others) have a
> > fundamental gap in our perception of what PHP should be, and how it can
> > stay competitive.
>
> This is exactly true. I really feel that php/zend engine could be a alot
> more
>than you must think it can be.
>
> The thing is the stuff that I/many people have in mind won't harm php as it
>is, its just that some people don't want these new features.
>
>Types:
><?
> string $var;
> int $int;
>
> $var = 123; // var will be a string
> $int = $var; // int will be a int
>
> $var2 = $var; // will be string NOTE: var2 wasn't declared
> $var2 = $int; // will be int
>
> // this is almost like a "auto" conversion... nothing more nothing less
>
> $ret = doSomething($var2, $var2);
>
> function doSomething(string $str, int $int)
> {
>
> }
>?>
>
>OO Support:
>
>interface thread
>{
> function run();
>}
>
>class MyClass implements thread
>{
> function run()
> {
> yeahRight();
> }
>
> function setSomething(string $test)
> {
> $this->something = $test;
> }
>
> opperator +(MyClass $class)
> {
> $this->something = $class->something;
> }
>
> opperator +(MyOtherClass $class)
> {
> $this->something = $class->otherSomething;
> }
>}
>
>class MyOtherClass extends MyClass
>{
>}
>
>MI:
>Someone posted a good mi example i don't recall where it may be
>
>class Person
>{
> function hello()
> {
> }
>}
>
>class OtherPerson
>{
> function hello()
> {
> }
>}
>
>class MulitPersonalites extends Person, otherPerson
>{
> var $currPerson;
>
> function MulitPersonalites()
> {
> parent::Person("Jake");
> parent::OtherPerson("Miles");
> }
>
> function Person::hello()
> {
> return super() . " from multi";
> }
>
> function hello()
> {
> if($this->currPerson == "Jake")
> $this->Person::hello();
> else
> $this->OtherPerson::hello();
> }
>}
>
>what ever the syntax "should" be....
>
>don't forget about the public private
>
>
>Multi threading:
> I know this is a huge change but.. again i think it is a good thing.
>
>
>Case Sensitive:
> I know the reasons for and against this and i agree with both of them. But I
>would rather see CS.
>
>For the most part the only argument against these is "do we need it" and "it
>will make things slower". Maybe somepeople do maybe somepeople don't but if
>someone "thinks" they need it then probally others do too, how much slower
>will
>some of these changes make the engine? Maybe not much at all. True these kinda
>things will make the languge more complicated and some people don't think that
>php should get complicated but I do, I think that making these kinda changes
>can only make php better.
>
> Again the point of this email isn't to change authors/founders minds its
> just
>my point of view.
>
>- Brad
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
>http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
