|
|
Posted by Steve on 04/22/07 18:33
"Vince Morgan" <vinhar@REMOVEoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:462b2b63$0$16552$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
|
| "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
| news:PI-dnRXMkqxCwLTbnZ2dnUVZ_qupnZ2d@comcast.com...
| > Vince Morgan wrote:
| > > "Steve" <no.one@example.com> wrote in message
| > > news:zGbWh.1456$go5.566@newsfe12.lga...
| > > You are undoubtedly aware that this has to be the most misunderstood
| > > behaviour in all of php. Perhaps in all programing in all languages!!
| The
| > > number of posts I've read in the last few hours that clearly
| misunderstand
| > > _set() and __get() is astonishing! And all I've gleened from them was
| > > further misunderstanding. Cant blame them realy. You have been trying
| to
| > > hammer the point home but the nails have just kept bending. I don't
| think
| > > I've ever been so confused about anything in my life.
| > > Thank you!!
| > > You have my undying grattitude Steve! :)))
| > > Vince
| > >
| > >
| >
| > Vince,
| >
| > It's probably misunderstood because it's pretty much a violation of OO
| > principles. OO principles indicate you can set and get values - but
| > that you have separate setter and getter functions for these.
| >
| > Now you can emulate this in other OO languages such as Java, C++ and
| > SmallTalk. But it's pretty much frowned upon. Experienced programmers
| > in these languages pretty much follow the defacto standard to have
| > separate getter and setter functions of each value you want to be able
| > to change/retrieve.
| >
| > Doing it other ways just gets into too much of a hassle.
| >
| > Now PHP has tried to implement something which really is against OO
| > principles (so what's new here?).
| >
| > I've looked at it - but I really don't find it useful. This style is
| > not implemented in other languages for very good reason - it really
| > complicates the code, just as these functions do in PHP.
| >
|
| I know I don't have to tell you that it certainly confused me. I was
quite
| stunned when I first saw that you could add methods to a js object.
| However, as you don't have access to the source of those classes I can
| understand why some consider it a whorthwhile feature.
| However, in the case of php where you do have such access it seems
ludicrous
| to me to do such a thing. If someone wants to add additional
functionality
| to a php object, why not simply write it into the class? Treating them as
| if they are compiled objects seems more than a little silly to me.
oh you do have access to the source of those classes. you can document.write
an entire js class if you wanted to...using alert none-the-less. even make a
prototype and forget whether the rhs assignment for a function should be
just the name or the name plus () ? figure out which is which and you've now
hacked how to get the source of custom objects.
as for php, you can just as easily make properties and functions and put
them into a custom class that you didn't author. __set/__get would help
prevent this...if you threw errors in your object to detect when this was
attempted.
it doesn't matter, to me, whether php objects are compiled or scripted. what
should be important is that objects are able to maintain their encapsulation
(if the author chooses to enforce it)...which is what __set/__get does. what
php is lacking is the default ability to assign private getters/setters to
properties such that:
$foo->bar = 'hello world';
would trigger bar's setter in your object's code. this is present in may
scripted languages and manditory for compiled languages like object c, c++,
c#, vb/.net, etc.
but anywho. :)
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|