Re: [RFC] Static class

From: Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 00:59:20 +0000
Subject: Re: [RFC] Static class
References: 1 2 3 4 5  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 5:52 PM Derick Rethans <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Jun 2024, Chuck Adams wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 25, 2024, at 9:17 AM, Derick Rethans <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Having read this thread, and the previous one from half a year ago,
> > > I will do so too. In short, we shouldn't be encouraging static
> > > classes as a bag of static functions, that ought to be just
> > > namespaced functions.
> >
> > Which brings us back to the age-old problem that functions can’t be
> > autoloaded. Me, I want first-class modules, but until we have those, I
> > have to settle for classes in the meantime. Scala/Kotlin-like
> > “companion objects” might be a good all-round substitute though.
>
> There has been some work done on function autoloading too:
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/core-autoloading
>
> cheers,
> Derick
>
>  My bad, I thought "top post" meant the same thing in mailing lists as it
does in forums. I am now aware of my mistake and it won't happen again. Can
we address my actual points now?

Lanre


Thread (71 messages)

« previous php.internals (#123909) next »