473,839 Members | 1,532 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

php 5 classes: public, protected and private

Hi,

finally giving php 5 a go, and going over the new approach to classes.
Can someone clarify the public, private and protected to me?

I quote the php manual: "The visibility of a property or method can be
defined by prefixing the declaration with the keywords: public,
protected or private. Public declared items can be accessed
everywhere."

But should I read "...can be accessed everywhere within a given class."
or "...can be accessed by all other classes." ?

Job

Nov 27 '06
86 4673

"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:rN******** *************** *******@comcast .com...
Tony Marston wrote:
< snip>
>>>>>Tony and I have been into this before. He breaks into conversations
>trying to spout his version of OO, with a few blogs from people no one
>every heard of to back him up.
I see. So in your opinion Martin Fowler is of of these "people no one
ever heard of "? He says, like I do, that "Encapsulat ion Wasn't Meant To
Mean Data Hiding" at http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2006/02/22/

Are you saying that YOU are more of an expert than Martin Fowler? What
arrogance !
No, I'm saying Booch, Rumbaugh and Jacobson, among others, are more
expert than Martin Fowler. And yes, I've heard of him.

But you're not quoting Martin Fowler. You're quoting Keith Ray's
INTERPRETATI ON if Martin Fowler.


If you bothered to follow the link to Martn Fowler's page at
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/GetterEradicator.html you would see in
paragraph 4 tha it is a direct quotation, not an interpretation.

Yes, and did you actually read that page? To quote from Martin Fowler:

"For me, the point of encapsulation isn't really about hiding the data,
but in hiding design decisions, particularly in areas where those
decisions may have to change. The internal data representation is one
example of this..."
The full quote is "The internal data representation is one example of this,
** but not the only one and not always the best one.**" The significant
point is the sentence which reads "point of encapsulation isn't really about
hiding the data, but in hiding design decisions". If you follow the link he
provides to
http://www.craiglarman.com/articles/...20Software.pdf
by Craig Larman there is an interesting chapter with the title "Informatio n
hiding is PV, not data encapsulation". The hiding of design decisions was
supposed to mean hiding the code which manipulates the data, not the data
itself.

As I have said several times, and quoted from other resources, encapsulation
is NOT about INFORMATION hiding but about IMPLEMENTATION hiding. There is a
subtle difference which you fail to grasp.
This is in perfect agreement with Booch, Rumbaugh, Iverson and others. And
a direct CONTRADICTION to troll Tony Marston.
>>
>>>>>It's not worth getting into the argument. He's just a troll with
>delusion s of competency.
If everyone who disagrees with you is incompetent then the world is full
of idiots. Your opinion is not the only opinion, and there are plenty of
"experts" who have opposing views.
No, I disagree with a lot of competent people. It's YOU who are an
incompeten t troll. And you continue to prove it.

Try these - with direct quotes from recognized experts, and examples:

http://www.research.umbc.edu/~tarr/d...ciples-2pp.pdf
http://www.nnwj.de/encapsulation.html

Or better yet, read the real books by these authors.

But I know you won't, because you disagree with what they say, and don't
want to burst your little bubble.

Troll.


Whether you like it or not there is no such thing as a single opinion as
to what OOP is and is not, and there are multiple interpretations as to
the real meaning of encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism,
implementati on hiding and information hiding. Just because you quote
sources who agree with you does not mean you are right and everybody else
is wrong. Here are sources with the opinion that "Encapsulat ion is NOT
information hiding":

http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2006/02/22/
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/GetterEradicator.html
http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/j...on.html?page=1
http://www.itmweb.com/essay550.htm
http://nat.truemesh.com/archives/000498.html

The world is full of different opinions, so who is to say which ones are
right and which ones are wrong?

Yea, and some, like yours, troll, are just wrong.
In your opinion they are wrong, but I do not value your opinion.
Read the experts I've mentioned several times. You might actually learn
something.

But I know you won't. Like all trolls you know everything and anyone who
disagrees with you is wrong - no matter how much of a recognized expert he
is.
All the "experts" in the world do not agree. "My" experts disagree with
"your" experts. Just because I, and many others, disagree with your opinion
does not make me/us wrong.
Go and crawl back into your hole, troll. And take your delusions of
competence with you.
Typical reaction of a moron. When you start losing the argument out come the
insults.

--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Dec 1 '06 #31
Tony Marston wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:rN******** *************** *******@comcast .com...
>>Tony Marston wrote:

< snip>
>>>>>>Tony and I have been into this before. He breaks into conversations
>>trying to spout his version of OO, with a few blogs from people no one
>>every heard of to back him up.
>
>
>I see. So in your opinion Martin Fowler is of of these "people no one
>ever heard of "? He says, like I do, that "Encapsulat ion Wasn't Meant To
>Mean Data Hiding" at http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2006/02/22/
>
>Are you saying that YOU are more of an expert than Martin Fowler? What
>arroganc e!
>

No, I'm saying Booch, Rumbaugh and Jacobson, among others, are more
expert than Martin Fowler. And yes, I've heard of him.

But you're not quoting Martin Fowler. You're quoting Keith Ray's
INTERPRETAT ION if Martin Fowler.
If you bothered to follow the link to Martn Fowler's page at
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/GetterEradicator.html you would see in
paragraph 4 tha it is a direct quotation, not an interpretation.

Yes, and did you actually read that page? To quote from Martin Fowler:

"For me, the point of encapsulation isn't really about hiding the data,
but in hiding design decisions, particularly in areas where those
decisions may have to change. The internal data representation is one
example of this..."


The full quote is "The internal data representation is one example of this,
** but not the only one and not always the best one.**" The significant
point is the sentence which reads "point of encapsulation isn't really about
hiding the data, but in hiding design decisions". If you follow the link he
provides to
http://www.craiglarman.com/articles/...20Software.pdf
by Craig Larman there is an interesting chapter with the title "Informatio n
hiding is PV, not data encapsulation". The hiding of design decisions was
supposed to mean hiding the code which manipulates the data, not the data
itself.

As I have said several times, and quoted from other resources, encapsulation
is NOT about INFORMATION hiding but about IMPLEMENTATION hiding. There is a
subtle difference which you fail to grasp.
No, the point YOU fail to grasp, which ALL the experts, including Martin
Fowler, is the actual variables used are PART OF THE IMPLEMENTATION.

I never said you should hide the information. But you should hide HOW
THE INFORMATION IS STORED. That is one of the DESIGN DECISIONS he is
talking about.

This is something on which EVERY expert agrees. But you fail to understand.

And the same thing with Craig Larman's article. He agrees that
encapsulation is good because it hides the design details. No one ever
claimed it hid information.

Wrong on both counts, Tony the Troll. Learn to read.
>
>>This is in perfect agreement with Booch, Rumbaugh, Iverson and others. And
a direct CONTRADICTION to troll Tony Marston.

>>>>>>It's not worth getting into the argument. He's just a troll with
>>delusio ns of competency.
>
>
>If everyone who disagrees with you is incompetent then the world is full
>of idiots. Your opinion is not the only opinion, and there are plenty of
>"experts " who have opposing views.
>

No, I disagree with a lot of competent people. It's YOU who are an
incompete nt troll. And you continue to prove it.

Try these - with direct quotes from recognized experts, and examples:

http://www.research.umbc.edu/~tarr/d...ciples-2pp.pdf
http://www.nnwj.de/encapsulation.html

Or better yet, read the real books by these authors.

But I know you won't, because you disagree with what they say, and don't
want to burst your little bubble.

Troll.
Whether you like it or not there is no such thing as a single opinion as
to what OOP is and is not, and there are multiple interpretations as to
the real meaning of encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism,
implementati on hiding and information hiding. Just because you quote
sources who agree with you does not mean you are right and everybody else
is wrong. Here are sources with the opinion that "Encapsulat ion is NOT
informatio n hiding":

http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2006/02/22/
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/GetterEradicator.html
http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/j...on.html?page=1
http://www.itmweb.com/essay550.htm
http://nat.truemesh.com/archives/000498.html

The world is full of different opinions, so who is to say which ones are
right and which ones are wrong?

Yea, and some, like yours, troll, are just wrong.


In your opinion they are wrong, but I do not value your opinion.
I really don't give a flying fuck if you or any other troll values my
opinion, Tony. Your idiocy is beyond comprehension.
>
>>Read the experts I've mentioned several times. You might actually learn
something.

But I know you won't. Like all trolls you know everything and anyone who
disagrees with you is wrong - no matter how much of a recognized expert he
is.


All the "experts" in the world do not agree. "My" experts disagree with
"your" experts. Just because I, and many others, disagree with your opinion
does not make me/us wrong.
Where did your "experts" get their training? The great Tony Martson
School of Bullshit?

These are experts recognized by the INDUSTRY - not me, not Tony Marston.
They are recognized by top programmers, university professors,
industry groups, publishers and more.

And quite frankly, troll Tony Marston's opinion on who an expert is
isn't important.
>
>>Go and crawl back into your hole, troll. And take your delusions of
competence with you.


Typical reaction of a moron. When you start losing the argument out come the
insults.
Yep, you've labeled yourself for sure. I am not "losing the argument".
Rather, you are just too thick-headed and stubborn to listen to the
real experts in the field.

You've done a little programming in one (or maybe even two) languages.
You think reading some of the crap on the Internet makes you an expert
in the matter.

Let me clue you in, Tony. You are far from an expert in anything. A
web site with some copied (and incorrect) information does not make you
an expert. Posting your bullshit in this and other newsgroups does not
make you an expert. And quoting people no one ever heard of does not
make you an expert.

Try working on an OO project with 100 programmers. Learn how to do
proper OO. Then spend another 5-10 years or so working your way up in
the OOAD field, until you're managing projects like the one above. Then
your opinions might count. I've done all of that over the years.

Or even read the books I mentioned by those authors.

But I know you won't. Like all trolls, you're just plain stupid, and
are totally afraid the bullshit you've been espousing might be wrong.

Go away, troll.

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attgl obal.net
=============== ===
Dec 1 '06 #32
Michael Fesser wrote:
.oO(Tony Marston)

>>That just tells me what interfaces ARE, but it certainly does not say that
interfaces are REQUIRED. It is possible to define a class method and access
it directly WITHOUT going through an interface, therefore an interface IS
NOT NECESSARY.


Forget it. Obviously you haven't understood what interfaces in PHP are
used for and what you can do/ensure with them. Just an example: Without
these interfaces it wouldn't be possible to use 'foreach' to iterate
over any arbitrary object:

foreach ($directory as $file) {...}
foreach ($resultSet as $record) {...}

Micha
Micha,

Tony is just a troll who is beyond stupid. He can't even understand the
"experts" he quotes. They contradict what he says, but he can't see that.

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attgl obal.net
=============== ===
Dec 1 '06 #33
Tony Marston wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:Du******** *************** *******@comcast .com...
< snip>
>>>>>>The PHP interface defines a set of methods (function) which are
>>require d by the classes which implement the interface. Java is similar
>>in that respect. But both are a subset of the total interface.
>
>
>It is possible to access the method directly without an interface,
>therefor e an interfae is not necessary.
>

"Possible " != "CORRECT"
That's just your opinion. Where does it say that I *MUST* define and use
an interface before I can access a class method? Interfaces are optional
(especuial ly in PHP) so it is not wrong to excercise the option NOT to
use them. I can define a class method and access that method without
using an interface, and that is what I choose to do.

When are you going to get it through that pea-sized mind of yours that a
PHP interface is not the same as an interface as defined in OO terms?

In OO terms, a public method is part of the interface. The PHP keyword
interface just defines a set of functions which must be implemented by the
class.

They are two entirely different things.


The fact that a method and an interface are different things is irrelevant.
I am just pointing out that in PHP an interface is not necessary as I can
access the method directly without going through an interface. Is this
statement true or false?
No, the fact that they are different are VERY RELEVANT. The fact you
can't understand the difference is also VERY RELEVANT. Or is it just
that you disregard facts which don't support with your stupidness?

Losing the argument so you need to disregard the facts? Typical troll
behavior.

Whether or not a PHP interface is required is immaterial - we are
talking about the OO concept of an interface, not PHP interfaces.

But that's way too deep for you to understand - the same word having
different meanings in different contexts? Hope your head didn't explode.

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attgl obal.net
=============== ===
Dec 1 '06 #34
Python does what LISP does with better syntax. So I would say Python
bets both LISP and PHP and with mod_python (for Apache), maybe you
should learn it.

Tony Marston wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:n9******** *************** *******@comcast .com...
Tony Marston wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:bp******** *************** *******@comcast .com...

Tony Marston wrote:

"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:Pe***** *************** **********@comc ast.com...
Tony Marston wrote:
>"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
>news:j9*** *************** ************@co mcast.com...
>
>
>
>>Tony Marston wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
>>>news:Ib* *************** **************@ comcast.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>jopperd epopper wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>You should read "can be accessed everywhere".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Priva te members can be accessed by members of the class only.
>>>>>>Prote cted members can be accessed by members of the class or a
>>>>>>deriv ed
>>>>>>class .
>>>>>>Publi c members can be accessed by anyone, including other
>>>>>>class es,
>>>>>>funct ions and any other code.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Than ks Jerry. I'm trying to make a bit of sense of the php 5
>>>>>approa ch
>>>>>to classes, and so far having a hard time. I fail to see the 'why'
>>>>>behi nd the 'public, protected and private' and stuff like
>>>>>abstra ction,
>>>>>interf aces and whatnot.
>>>
>>>
>>>Inteface s are not necessary in PHP. Once you have defined a method
>>>it is a total waste to time to also define an interface. Interfaces
>>>are a "fix" in those languages as a means of dealing with optional
>>>argument s and statyic typing. PHP has ifferent ways of dealing with
>>>bth of these, therefore interfaces serve no useful purpose.
>>>
>>
>>Ah, the great Tony Marston is back to trolling again.
>>
>>Wrong. In OO terms, the interface is the way to interact with the
>>object. It consists of all public members - both methods (functions,
>>in PHP) and variables. And for derived classes, the base class adds
>>protect ed members.
>>
>>A PHP interface is something entirely different.
>
>
>I disagree. It is possible to define a function (method) within a
>class,
>then to define a separate thing called an "interface" . It is possible
>access
>the function without using the interface, therefore the interface is
>not
>necessar y.
>

Tony,

You really need to learn about OO before spouting off. In OO terms, an
interface is something entirely different than a PHP interface.
How so? All the documentation I have seen describes how an interface
simply describes a method which it imlements. If it is possible to
access a method (a function in PHP) without going though an interface,
ten an interface is not necessary in any language.
You need to understand the difference between an interface as described
in OO terms and the PHP interface.

The PHP interface defines a set of methods (function) which are required
by the classes which implement the interface. Java is similar in that
respect. But both are a subset of the total interface.
It is possible to access the method directly without an interface,
therefore an interfae is not necessary.
"Possible" != "CORRECT"

That's just your opinion. Where does it say that I *MUST* define and use an
interface before I can access a class method? Interfaces are optional
(especuially in PHP) so it is not wrong to excercise the option NOT to use
them. I can define a class method and access that method without using an
interface, and that is what I choose to do.

--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Dec 1 '06 #35
..oO(Jerry Stuckle)
>Tony is just a troll who is beyond stupid.
I start to believe that. ;(

Micha
Dec 1 '06 #36
..oO(Tony Marston)
>Just an example: Without
these interfaces it wouldn't be possible to use 'foreach' to iterate
over any arbitrary object:

foreach ($directory as $file) {...}
foreach ($resultSet as $record) {...}

With PHP 5 it is possible to use 'foreach' on an object without the use of
interfaces, so your argument is not valid.
It's a huge difference whether you just loop through all of the object's
properties like an array (that's what you described above) or if each
iteration automatically calls a particular method, which for example
fetches the next record from a database.

The latter is the basis of the SPL extension and not possible without
interfaces. Maybe IYHO the entire extension is not valid as well?

Micha
Dec 1 '06 #37

"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:kv******** *************** *******@comcast .com...
Tony Marston wrote:
>"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:Du******* *************** ********@comcas t.com...
< snip>
>>>>>>>The PHP interface defines a set of methods (function) which are
>>>requir ed by the classes which implement the interface. Java is
>>>simila r in that respect. But both are a subset of the total
>>>interfac e.
>>
>>
>>It is possible to access the method directly without an interface,
>>therefo re an interfae is not necessary.
>>
>
>"Possibl e" != "CORRECT"
That's just your opinion. Where does it say that I *MUST* define and use
an interface before I can access a class method? Interfaces are optional
(especuiall y in PHP) so it is not wrong to excercise the option NOT to
use them. I can define a class method and access that method without
using an interface, and that is what I choose to do.
When are you going to get it through that pea-sized mind of yours that a
PHP interface is not the same as an interface as defined in OO terms?

In OO terms, a public method is part of the interface. The PHP keyword
interface just defines a set of functions which must be implemented by
the class.

They are two entirely different things.


The fact that a method and an interface are different things is
irrelevant. I am just pointing out that in PHP an interface is not
necessary as I can access the method directly without going through an
interface. Is this statement true or false?

No, the fact that they are different are VERY RELEVANT. The fact you
can't understand the difference is also VERY RELEVANT. Or is it just that
you disregard facts which don't support with your stupidness?

Losing the argument so you need to disregard the facts? Typical troll
behavior.

Whether or not a PHP interface is required is immaterial - we are talking
about the OO concept of an interface, not PHP interfaces.

But that's way too deep for you to understand - the same word having
different meanings in different contexts? Hope your head didn't explode.
This is a PHP newsgroup, so I am explaining how interfaces work within PHP.
It is a simple fact that interfaces ARE NOT NECESSARY in PHP. The fact that
interfaces are treated differently in other languages is totally irrelevant.
The fact that YOU think that interfaces in PHP should behave exactly the
same as in other languages is also irrelevant.

--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Dec 2 '06 #38

"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:Wf******** *************** *******@comcast .com...
Tony Marston wrote:
>"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:rN******* *************** ********@comcas t.com...
>>>Tony Marston wrote:

< snip>
>>>>>>>Tony and I have been into this before. He breaks into conversations
>>>trying to spout his version of OO, with a few blogs from people no
>>>one every heard of to back him up.
>>
>>
>>I see. So in your opinion Martin Fowler is of of these "people no one
>>ever heard of "? He says, like I do, that "Encapsulat ion Wasn't Meant
>>To Mean Data Hiding" at
>>http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2006/02/22/
>>
>>Are you saying that YOU are more of an expert than Martin Fowler? What
>>arrogance !
>>
>
>No, I'm saying Booch, Rumbaugh and Jacobson, among others, are more
>expert than Martin Fowler. And yes, I've heard of him.
>
>But you're not quoting Martin Fowler. You're quoting Keith Ray's
>INTERPRETA TION if Martin Fowler.
If you bothered to follow the link to Martn Fowler's page at
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/GetterEradicator.html you would see in
paragraph 4 tha it is a direct quotation, not an interpretation.
Yes, and did you actually read that page? To quote from Martin Fowler:

"For me, the point of encapsulation isn't really about hiding the data,
but in hiding design decisions, particularly in areas where those
decisions may have to change. The internal data representation is one
example of this..."


The full quote is "The internal data representation is one example of
this, ** but not the only one and not always the best one.**" The
significant point is the sentence which reads "point of encapsulation
isn't really about hiding the data, but in hiding design decisions". If
you follow the link he provides to
http://www.craiglarman.com/articles/...20Software.pdf
by Craig Larman there is an interesting chapter with the title
"Informatio n hiding is PV, not data encapsulation". The hiding of design
decisions was supposed to mean hiding the code which manipulates the
data, not the data itself.

As I have said several times, and quoted from other resources,
encapsulatio n is NOT about INFORMATION hiding but about IMPLEMENTATION
hiding. There is a subtle difference which you fail to grasp.

No, the point YOU fail to grasp, which ALL the experts, including Martin
Fowler, is the actual variables used are PART OF THE IMPLEMENTATION.

I never said you should hide the information. But you should hide HOW THE
INFORMATION IS STORED. That is one of the DESIGN DECISIONS he is talking
about.
I suggest you learn to read. The article by Craig Larman clearly states "In
it, Parnas introduces information hiding. Many people have misinterpretted
this term as meaning data encapsulation, and some books erroneously define
the concepts as synonyms"
Do you see? "Encapsulat ion" is not supposed to mean "data encapsulation".

This is something on which EVERY expert agrees. But you fail to
understand.
Not EVERY export. Some agree, some don't..
And the same thing with Craig Larman's article. He agrees that
encapsulation is good because it hides the design details. No one ever
claimed it hid information.

Wrong on both counts, Tony the Troll. Learn to read.
"Encapsulat ion" is not supposed to mean "data encapsulation". It is supposed
to hide the implemetation (code), not the information (data).
>>
>>>This is in perfect agreement with Booch, Rumbaugh, Iverson and others.
And a direct CONTRADICTION to troll Tony Marston.
>>>It's not worth getting into the argument. He's just a troll with
>>>delusion s of competency.
>>
>>
>>If everyone who disagrees with you is incompetent then the world is
>>full of idiots. Your opinion is not the only opinion, and there are
>>plenty of "experts" who have opposing views.
>>
>
>No, I disagree with a lot of competent people. It's YOU who are an
>incompeten t troll. And you continue to prove it.
I see. I agree with some of the people that you disagree with, yet that
makes me a troll.
>>>>>Try these - with direct quotes from recognized experts, and examples:
>
>http://www.research.umbc.edu/~tarr/d...ciples-2pp.pdf
>http://www.nnwj.de/encapsulation.html
>
>Or better yet, read the real books by these authors.
>
>But I know you won't, because you disagree with what they say, and
>don't want to burst your little bubble.
>
>Troll.
Whether you like it or not there is no such thing as a single opinion as
to what OOP is and is not, and there are multiple interpretations as to
the real meaning of encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism,
implementat ion hiding and information hiding. Just because you quote
sources who agree with you does not mean you are right and everybody
else is wrong. Here are sources with the opinion that "Encapsulat ion is
NOT information hiding":

http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2006/02/22/
http://martinfowler.com/bliki/GetterEradicator.html
http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/j...on.html?page=1
http://www.itmweb.com/essay550.htm
http://nat.truemesh.com/archives/000498.html

The world is full of different opinions, so who is to say which ones are
right and which ones are wrong?
Yea, and some, like yours, troll, are just wrong.


In your opinion they are wrong, but I do not value your opinion.

I really don't give a flying fuck if you or any other troll values my
opinion, Tony. Your idiocy is beyond comprehension.
>>
>>>Read the experts I've mentioned several times. You might actually learn
something.

But I know you won't. Like all trolls you know everything and anyone who
disagrees with you is wrong - no matter how much of a recognized expert
he is.


All the "experts" in the world do not agree. "My" experts disagree with
"your" experts. Just because I, and many others, disagree with your
opinion does not make me/us wrong.

Where did your "experts" get their training? The great Tony Martson
School of Bullshit?

These are experts recognized by the INDUSTRY - not me, not Tony Marston.
They are recognized by top programmers, university professors, industry
groups, publishers and more.

And quite frankly, troll Tony Marston's opinion on who an expert is isn't
important.
Neither is yours.
>>>Go and crawl back into your hole, troll. And take your delusions of
competence with you.


Typical reaction of a moron. When you start losing the argument out come
the insults.

Yep, you've labeled yourself for sure. I am not "losing the argument".
Rather, you are just too thick-headed and stubborn to listen to the real
experts in the field.
As I keep on saying, there is no such thing as one set of experts with whom
EVERYBODY agrees, just as there is no such thing as one programming style
with which EVEYBODY agrees.In every walk of life there are different
opinions, and all I am doing is expressing an opinion which isdifferent from
yours.
You've done a little programming in one (or maybe even two) languages.
I have done a lot of programming in many languages.
You think reading some of the crap on the Internet makes you an expert in
the matter.
Just as the crap you read makes you an expert.
Let me clue you in, Tony. You are far from an expert in anything. A web
site with some copied (and incorrect)
It is only your opinion that it is incorect. Other people do not think so.
information does not make you an expert. Posting your bullshit in this
and other newsgroups does not make you an expert.
Posting your bullsh*t does not make you an expert either.
And quoting people no one ever heard of does not make you an expert.
Just because you haven't heard of them does no mean that they do not exist,
nor hat their opinions are worthless.
Try working on an OO project with 100 programmers. Learn how to do
proper OO.
I once worked on a project with a team of so-called OO "experts", and it was
the worst technical disaster of my entire career. They were so full of their
fancy ideas they coud not tell which way was up. They were so incompetent
they could not find their own backsides in the dark if you let them use both
hands and gave them a map and compass.
Then spend another 5-10 years or so working your way up in the OOAD
field, until you're managing projects like the one above. Then your
opinions might count. I've done all of that over the years.

Or even read the books I mentioned by those authors.

But I know you won't. Like all trolls, you're just plain stupid, and are
totally afraid the bullshit you've been espousing might be wrong.

Go away, troll.
No, I won't. I will keep contradicting your opinions until hell freezes over
for the simple reason that I, and others, do not agree with your opinions.

--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Dec 2 '06 #39

"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attg lobal.netwrote in message
news:Wf******** *************** *******@comcast .com...
Michael Fesser wrote:
>.oO(Tony Marston)

>>>That just tells me what interfaces ARE, but it certainly does not say
that interfaces are REQUIRED. It is possible to define a class method and
access it directly WITHOUT going through an interface, therefore an
interface IS NOT NECESSARY.


Forget it. Obviously you haven't understood what interfaces in PHP are
used for and what you can do/ensure with them. Just an example: Without
these interfaces it wouldn't be possible to use 'foreach' to iterate
over any arbitrary object:

foreach ($directory as $file) {...}
foreach ($resultSet as $record) {...}

Micha

Micha,

Tony is just a troll who is beyond stupid. He can't even understand the
"experts" he quotes. They contradict what he says, but he can't see that.
They also contradict what you say, and you can't see that.

--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Dec 2 '06 #40

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

7
1812
by: verbatime | last post by:
Please explain me how this works - or should work: Got my two classes - bcBasic (baseclass) and the derived cBasic. //--------------------------------------- class bcBasic { int number; virtual long myfunc(void); }
45
3637
by: Steven T. Hatton | last post by:
This is a purely *hypothetical* question. That means, it's /pretend/, CP. ;-) If you were forced at gunpoint to put all your code in classes, rather than in namespace scope (obviously classes themselves are an exception to this), and 'bootstrap' your program by instantiating a single application object in main(), would that place any limitations on what you could accomplish with your program? Are there any benefits to doing things that...
3
2068
by: Bryan Parkoff | last post by:
I have C++ Primer Third Edition -- Author Stanley B. Lippman and Josee Lajoie. I have been studying it for couple months however it does not provide a valuable information which it is about "friend to class". I am very disappointed because it is the way how C++ Compiler is designed. I assume that "friend to class" is not the good option. If CMain class is initialized before CA class, CB class, and CC class are initialized inside CMain...
14
3811
by: Pratts | last post by:
I am a new one who have joined u plz try to help me bcoz i could not find ny sutiable answer foer this Question Qus>>why do we need classes when structures provide similar functionality??
6
3369
by: steve bull | last post by:
I created a usercontrol class, RGBColorSpace, which is derived from an abstract class, ColorSpace, but when I try to click on the design panel for the control I get an error message "Unable to create instance of abstract class ColorSpace". I never try to create a class ColorSpace and don't really want to create a regular class with virtual methods. Does anyone know why I am having this problem? The code seems to run fine and I can actually...
11
3855
by: Kevin Prichard | last post by:
Hi all, I've recently been following the object-oriented techiques discussed here and have been testing them for use in a web application. There is problem that I'd like to discuss with you experts. I would like to produce Javascript classes that can be "subclassed" with certain behaviors defined at subclass time. There are plenty of ways to do this through prototyping and other techniques, but these behaviors need to be static and...
5
2011
by: Chris Szabo | last post by:
Good afternoon everyone. I'm running into a problem deserializing a stream using the XmlSerializer. A stored procedure returns the following from SQL Server: <Student StudentId="1" Status="1" Gpa="3.50"> <Person Id="1" FirstName="FirstName0" LastName="LastName0" MiddleInitial="W"/> </Student> In my code, person is the base class and student extends it. When I
2
2376
by: miked | last post by:
I am architecting in a read only class for use in mapping data to a business object. The object makes strong use of nested classes and their ability to access protected fields. The downside is when a nested class inherits from it’s parent class you get this infinite class chain in intellisense when consuming the class. To get around this I created two child classes Reader and Writer which require a base Person object. When consuming...
47
4051
by: Larry Smith | last post by:
I just read a blurb in MSDN under the C++ "ref" keyword which states that: "Under the CLR object model, only public single inheritance is supported". Does this mean that no .NET class can ever support multiple inheritance. In C++ for instance I noticed that the compiler flags an error if you use the "ref" keyword on a class with multiple base classes. This supports the above quote. However, under the "CodeClass2.Bases" property (part...
0
9696
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it. First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
0
10903
Oralloy
by: Oralloy | last post by:
Hello folks, I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>". The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed. This is as boiled down as I can make it. Here is my compilation command: g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp Here is the code in...
0
10584
jinu1996
by: jinu1996 | last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth. The Art of Business Website Design Your website is...
0
10290
tracyyun
by: tracyyun | last post by:
Dear forum friends, With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
1
7827
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules. He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms. Adolph will...
0
7015
by: conductexam | last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one. At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image. Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
0
5681
by: TSSRALBI | last post by:
Hello I'm a network technician in training and I need your help. I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs. The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols. I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
1
4482
by: 6302768590 | last post by:
Hai team i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
3
3131
bsmnconsultancy
by: bsmnconsultancy | last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.