"Ernest E Vogelsinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:5.1.1.6.2.20021108175627.00b44880@;mail.vogelsinger.at...
>
> This is clearly said in your PHP.ini file:
>
> ; Whether to enable the ability to force arguments to be passed by
reference
> ; at function call time. This method is depr
At 17:32 08.11.2002, Tim Molendijk spoke out and said:
[snip]
>why do you think it won't be supported by future versions? all i do is
>passing an object by reference. because in this case this function always
>should accept its argument as a reference and the
"Ernest E Vogelsinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:5.1.1.6.2.20021108170633.00b8cb60@;mail.vogelsinger.at...
>
> You might always simply omit the parameter when calling the function
> (you'll get a notice about that if enabled). You just cannot pass
constants:
>
> function Product(&$
At 17:04 08.11.2002, Tim Molendijk spoke out and said:
[snip]
>Yes I know it is poor programming habits to do like I did... But I have a
>reason for it. I have quite a lot methods that accept objects *optional*. So
>f.e.:
>---
>class Product
>{
>var $lang
"Ernest E Vogelsinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:5.1.1.6.2.20021108165218.03238948@;mail.vogelsinger.at...
> One more:
>
> True for now, but this is "officially deprecated". Functions or methods
> accepting a reference are required to be "prototyped" that way - this
helps
> you not
One more:
At 16:48 08.11.2002, Tim Molendijk spoke out and said:
[snip]
>
>This is not true in my case, because instead of doing:
>function add(&$child) { ... }
>I do:
>function add($child) { ... }
>and then call it with:
>$this->add(&$child);
>
>This has th
At 16:48 08.11.2002, Tim Molendijk spoke out and said:
[snip]
>The problem is solved and I completely understand why now. This last thing
>is thanks to you Ernest.
[snip]
Glad it works - you're very welcome :)
--
"Ernest E Vogelsinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:5.1.1.6.2.20021108092657.02befe20@;mail.vogelsinger.at...
> At 03:36 08.11.2002, Tim Molendijk said:
> [snip]
>
> Ahh - culprit 1:
>
> You said the container is creating a child instance - I ass
ctual new object (if that's not too confusing...)
>
> It's to do with the way the assignment operator works..
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Molendijk [mailto:tawm@;wanadoo.nl]
> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:14 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subjec
At 03:36 08.11.2002, Tim Molendijk said:
[snip]
>begin first code snippet
>/* New Container object created. At the same time it sets a Child object in
>its $child attribute. (This is indicated by passing TRUE.) */
>
ed and not the
actual new object (if that's not too confusing...)
It's to do with the way the assignment operator works..
-Original Message-
From: Tim Molendijk [mailto:tawm@;wanadoo.nl]
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PHP] Weird behaviour wi
Hi all,
First of all, thank you for the suggestions.
Actually I accidently found a solution to the problem... Not that I
understand it now, I just found a way to cope with it. By changing the first
line of the first code snippet:
$testContainer1 = new Container(TRUE);
into:
This sounds like a matter that ought to make it to the programmers who code
PHP itself. In the meantime can you code around it now that you know the
bug is there?
Mike
"Marco Tabini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:1036725595.21741.868.camel@;localhost.localdomain...
> I'm not sure if
Hi,
Friday, November 8, 2002, 12:36:03 PM, you wrote:
TM> First of all I would like to say that I know this is a lot of text but I
TM> would be very pleased if you take a little time to read it nevertheless. The
TM> situation described below is not complicated at all...
TM> ===
I'm not sure if my answer is going to be of much help, but I think this
has to do with the way PHP handles references and copies of objects--it
uses what I understand is a lazy copy mechanism, and thus the results on
object manipulations can yield odd results. There was a discussion on a
similar pr
15 matches
Mail list logo
