[ man.. I just realized that "reply" to this list doesn't send to the
list... replies being re-sent... thanks for the help! ]
On Dec 6, 2005, at 10:45 PM, Curt Zirzow wrote:
I'm going to jump to the code as fast as possible to explain what I
can, the key thing to remember in php5 is that the old &$var
declaration has no real meaning in objects. php5's objects exist
outside of the old oop reference. Consider:
class Object {
public $val;
function __construct($v) {
$this->val = $v;
}
}
In PHP5:
$o = new Object(2);
$b = $o;
$b->val = 3;
print $o->val; // echos 3
in PHP4 (assuming var is used instead of public)
$o = new Object(2);
$b = $o;
$b->val = 3;
print $o->val; // echos 2
This is cause objects in php5 exist all on there own, that get
referenced to a php variable.
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 05:23:45PM -0500, Alan Pinstein wrote:
Question #1: Is the fact that references to objects in the form
$objRef = &$obj don't bump the refcount of $obj an intended behavior
that can be counted on? If so, cool!
So, now that we have a way to do weak references, we should be able
to implement a reasonable memory management scheme for parent-child
objects.
Normally from the client side the interface should look something
like:
$parent = new Parent();
$child = new Child();
$parent->addChild($child);
Ok, i get to the code and well what I mentioned above explains why
there is no
need to use the $o = &$object;
If I take your code and run it against one of the latest version's
of php 5.1 i will get a var_dump($child) of:
object(pChild)#2 (1) {
["parent"]=>
object(pParent)#1 (1) {
["children"]=>
array(1) {
[0]=>
object(pChild)#2 (1) {
["parent"]=>
object(pParent)#1 (1) {
["children"]=>
array(1) {
[0]=>
*RECURSION*
}
}
}
}
}
}
Which is what I see as expected results.
Curt.
--
cat .signature: No such file or directory
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
