Re: Stop Breaking Our Apps For the Sake of OO

From: Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 19:29:38 +0000
Subject: Re: Stop Breaking Our Apps For the Sake of OO
References: 1 2  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message 
On 5/11/06, Marcus Boerger <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello Derick,

Thursday, May 11, 2006, 2:15:53 PM, you wrote:

Hello!

While I welcome new developments in either procedural or OO interfaces
in PHP I do not agree with breaking BC (between 5.1 and 5.2 in this
case) just for the sake of OO purity. In this example there is the
following class:

<?php
abstract class ezcDbHandler extends PDO
{

    public function __construct( $dbParams, $dsn )
    {
        $user          = null;
        $pass          = null;
        $driverOptions = null;
    }



    abstract static public function getName();



    static public function hasFeature( $feature )
    {
        return false;
    }

}
?>>

It simply makes no sense at all! Actually if we go that road then what you
really want is two things: First fix your app design to something usable
where your code makes sense</sorry> Second allow static method interfaces
with bodies as well as non static abstract function in classes that have
bodies (aka default implementations).


Marcus, I'm going to give you an unproducive answer again. First (and
despite your good work), I'm not really finding your answer anywhere
close from productive. To be honest, I even find it a bit arrogant and
respect less. I also have enough of your "fix your code" answer.

Second, your 300k patch is typically what I would consider as highly
dangerous. I'm not saying that each part of this patch are not
required, but it would have been better to commit smaller patches. For
example,  the zif to zim prefix changes, or to drop
ze1_compatibility_mode.

In the same area, commit to to extensions with "Methods have flags" as
message is nice, but who knows what you are talking about? I mean, how
should I know that 5.2 ZE2 internal APIs have changed? Yes, the API nr
has been bumped and there is a lot of new functions in your 300k
commit. Does it have any mention of the API changes (new
argument/breakage)? I do not see any.

So excuse me but I really find that annoying, even if I really
appreciate the fresh air you bring to the engine. Please consider to
inform us (php core developers, pecl developers) in the future and try
to make small patches instead of huge and unreadable patches. I have
to do it everytime I provided changes for something outside my
extensions, it is not that hard :-)

Thanks for your attention,

Cheers,

--Pierre

Thread (33 messages)

« previous php.internals (#23262) next »