|
|
Posted by Vince Morgan on 04/20/07 20:22
"Steve" <no.one@example.com> wrote in message
news:L18Wh.591$jj6.399@newsfe03.lga...
Having lurked silently, I'll just surface for a mo and see if I can test the
water without taking too many hits ;)
The way I see this you are suggesting using __set and __get in a fashion
that, to a C++ programer, looks somewhat similar to operator overloading.
Ie:
$Obj->prop = 12;
$t = $Obj->prop;
$Obj->prop * 2;
$t = $Obj->prop * 2;
etc.
Personaly I find this appealing as it is more inclined toward the way I
prefer to use objects in C++ when practical.
Of course this may be due to my preference toward that which I am most
familiar, and my lack of experience with php.
Perhaps it does also have some synactic sugeriness about it, but I do have a
sweet coding tooth. The argument that it does break one of the basic
accepted features of oop by giving the internals public scope does have some
merit. However, personaly I've not ever been tempted to access private
props within an object, nor do I ever remember doing so accidently. And, if
I were to provide such a class to another coder and he/she did so, I would
have to wonder at his/her proficiencey. Having an object actualy water
tight is to assume almost complete oblivion on the part of the user.
It would not be something I imagine a very experienced php programer would
find immediately intuitive, but then that is certainly not myself.
Of course, I could actualy be completely off the track, it is very late in
the eve, ooops, no, it's now actualy quite early in the morning here. But
if I am understanding all of this correctly. I think it has merit
personaly. I prefer an object that behaves more like an inbuilt, than one
that doesn't.
Having said all this, its time for a crash dive.
Regards,
Vince
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|