On Tuesday 09 October 2007, Tony Marston wrote: > I have bought and read several books on design patterns without being > impressed. I have seen countless examples of how particular design patterns > can be implemented, and I am even more unimpressed. Unless you can explain, > simply and with simple examples, of things that can ONLY be achieved > through the use of interfaces then I will continue to say tha they are a > waste of time. Classic OOP (C++/PHP/Java, etc.) is, really, an extension on top of procedural programming. Nothing that you do with objects couldn't be done without them. They are equally expressive. OOP is just syntactic sugar to make writing certain logical structures easier (less code, more readable code, code that's harder, but not impossible, for someone else to break, etc.). There is absolutely nothing that can ONLY be achieved through, for instance, interfaces. It's just that interfaces make it a hell of a lot easier to solve certain problems than doing everything with non-dynamic functions. Anything you can do with functions you can also do with GOTO statements. functions are just syntactic sugar to make writing logical structures easier. Until you can explain, with examples, some problem that can ONLY be solved through the use of functions I will continue to say that they are a waste of time. Anything that you can do in PHP you could also do in assembler. PHP is just syntactic sugar to make writing logical structures easier. Until you can explain, with examples, some problem that can ONLY be solved through the use of PHP I will continue to say that it is a waste of time. Yes, I am making fun of you for a piss-stupid Luddite argument. :-) > *My* definition of encapsulation is *the* definition of encapsulation as it > was originally intended. The fact that other smart arse numbskulls have > corrupted it with their own stupid embellishments is something which I > choose to ignore. *My* definition of dark green is *the* definition as it was originally intended. The fact that other smart-ass numbskulls have corrupted it with their own stupid saturation embellishments is something which I choose to ignore. (Yes, I am making fun of you again.) > > but you admit, the php5 construct is better and therefore strengthen my > > initial argument, which was, if php5 is better and php4 is deprecated; > > why bother > > w/ php4. > > Your statement was that it would be absolutely pointless trying to learn > OOP with PHP 4 which implies that it is not possible to write object > oriented programs wth PHP 4 at all. That is absolute crap as PHP 4 provides > ALL the basic necessities for OOP, which are encapsulation, inheritance and > polyorphism. Here's a better reason to not bother learning PHP 4-style OOP. You have less than a year until running PHP 4 at all is considered an unsupported security risk. Don't waste your time, since PHP 5 OOP IS different, because reference handling changed drastically which means what is "fast and easy" in PHP 4 OOP and what is "fast and easy" in PHP 5 OOP is hugely different. > > if you read that one chapter i recommended you will see; acquiring the > > behavior of the parent is not always desirable. > > Then why inherit from the parent in the first place? Or why not create a > method in the subclass which overrides the method in the superclass, thus > changing the behaviour to what you prefer? I certainly don't need > interfaces to do that. Because I want to syntactically guarantee the existence of certain methods so that I can reliably call functionality on them. Call-and-pray is an unreliable methodology. Yes, that is syntactic sugar. See above. Can we stop with the pissing contest now? -- Larry Garfield AIM: LOLG42 larry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ICQ: 6817012 "If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it." -- Thomas Jefferson -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
