I am using Drupal 7 and I am using my custom module's .info file along with the "files[] = ...." directive to allow autoloading of my classes when required. Each class only contains static public functions and everything is working nicely when these functions are called from a function of the general scope.
Working example:
If I go to /devel/php and call the function ClassTwo::getValue() everything is executed without error.
Example with error:
If I call the function ClassTwo::getValue() from within another autoloaded function ClassOne::generate() an exception is thrown that the class ClassTwo() doesn't exist. The error is solved if I specifically include the file containing the class ClassTwo.
I don't believe it has something to do with Drupal's autoloading mechanism though. Is my scenario allowed in PHP 5.3?
For better clarification I have added below example code. That's the nearest I can provide to working code.
mymodule/mymodule.info
name = "MyModule"
core = "7.x"
files[] = "includes/plugins/ClassOne.inc"
files[] = "includes/plugins/ClassTwo.inc"
mymodule/mymodule.module
function mymodule_page_callback() {
return ClassOne::generate();
}
mymodule/includes/plugins/ClassOne.inc
Class ClassOne {
static public function generate() {
$value = ClassTwo::getValue();
// Process $value
return $value;
}
}
mymodule/includes/plugins/ClassTwo.inc
Class ClassTwo {
static public function getValue() {
// Somehow retrieve the value.
return $value;
}
}
UPDATE: Using Drupal's xautoload module with PSR-4 everything works incredibly fine and I have turned to this method as a solution. If anyone has an answer though, other than PSR-0/PSR-4, I would like to know it.
Related
So I've been in the process of updating someones old CI 1 to CI 3 code. In process. In particular, the URI class extension is not working. I've read the CI documentation switched to __construct() and moved it to the application/core directory. I've checked SO and all cases are correct, but I still get the following error:
Call to undefined method MY_URI::last()
My code below
class MY_URI extends CI_URI {
function __construct()
{
parent::__construct();
}
function last()
{
return $this->segment(count($this->segments));
}
}
Thoughts as to why this may be happening with the switch? Checking StackOverflow it said chek your config settings by the config has the correct
$config['subclass_prefix'] = 'MY_';
I'm calling it with:
$lastURI = $this->uri->last();
Update: I've also tried the
exit('MY_URI.php loaded');
trick at the top which seems to work, but it still throws the error when I remark it out and never loads the extension.
Place your MY_URI.php file inside the application/core/MY_URI.php & update the function like following.
public function last(){
return $this->segment($this->total_segments());
}
call it like below
$last = $this->uri->last();
I have a custom class called Error that I autoload before anything else. In my custom class, I have a constructor and a singleton Get function like this:
class Error
{
// Singleton object. Leave $me alone.
private static $me;
public $errors; // Array of errors
public $style; // CSS rules to apply to error elements
private function __construct($style = "border:1px solid red;")
{
$this->errors = array();
$this->style = $style;
}
// Get Singleton object
public static function getError()
{
if(is_null(self::$me))
self::$me = new Error();
return self::$me;
}
//...
}
In my master include, I've always prepared a singleton of this custom class before the core logic:
$Error = Error::getError();
However, in PHP 7 this is now giving me an error:
Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined method
Error::getError()
Can you help me understand why this doesn't work anymore? I've tried this instead to check whether the Error class is being loaded at all, and it does work (and call the constructor):
$Error = new Error();
Somehow I can't call the static class function unless I've instanced this class. This will break a lot of other logic I have if that's truly a change in php7.
As of PHP 7, PHP includes a built-in Error class which appears to be in conflict with your application's Error class.
PHP pre-defined Error class
If your own application's class is not defined within a custom namespace and you are attempting to call Error::getError(), PHP will assume you mean the built-in class which has no defined getError() method. (It does have a similar getMessage() non-static method).
You may work around this by adding a custom namespace to your application, which is a recommended practice anyway. Or if your application has no requirement to continue running under PHP 5.x, consider refactoring it to use the built-in Error class functionality instead.
I'm currently making my first website with PHP. Rather than writing autoload for each individual page, I wish to create one file with a general autoload ability.
Here is my autoloadControl.php:
// nullify any existing autoloads
spl_autoload_register(null,false);
//specify extensions that may be loaded
spl_autoload_extensions('.php. .class.php');
function regularLoader($className){
$file = $className.'.php';
include $file;
}
//register the loader function
spl_autoload_register('regularLoader');
Here is my index.php file:
require("header.php");
require("autoloadControl.php");
$dbConnection = new dbControl();
$row=$dbConnection->getLatestEntry();
Currently, the $dbConnection = new dbControl() gives me the following error:
Fatal error: Class 'dbControl'
So my question is, is there a way to use autoload this way or must I place it at the top of every PHP file I write that uses another file?
Placing spl_autoload in an external file is both valid and a good practice for making your code more maintainable--change in one place what could be 10, 20, or more.
It appears that your dbControl class is not being provided in the code you provided. Assuming you are including the class before referencing it, and the class works properly, then you should have no problem accomplishing this task.
require("header.php");
require("autoloadControl.php");
$dbConnection = new dbControl(); // Where is this class located?
Here is an OOP approach for your autoloadControl.php file:
<?php
class Loader
{
public static function registerAutoload()
{
return spl_autoload_register(array(__CLASS__, 'includeClass'));
}
public static function unregisterAutoload()
{
return spl_autoload_unregister(array(__CLASS__, 'includeClass'));
}
public static function registerExtensions()
{
return spl_autoload_extensions('.php. .class.php');
}
public static function includeClass($class)
{
require(PATH . '/' . strtr($class, '_\\', '//') . '.php');
}
}
?>
Your problem is not related to where you are defining your callback, but how.
Using spl_autoload_extensions('.php') would achieve the same thing as your custom callback; you don't need both if your callback is as simple as this. Your comment is also wrong - calling spl_autoload_register with no arguments will not clear current callbacks, but it will register the default callback.
However, in your code, you have specified the argument to spl_autoload_extensions incorrectly - it should be a comma-separated list of extensions. So I think what you want is this:
// Tell default autoloader to look for class_name.php and class_name.class.php
spl_autoload_extensions('.php,.class.php')
// Register default autoloader
spl_autoload_register();
// READY!
The main difference this will make from your code is that the default autoloader will look for 'dbcontrol.php' (all lower-case) whereas yours will look for 'dbControl.php' (case as mentioned in PHP code). Either way, you certainly don't need both.
i'm having trouble with a redeclare error. I can't find a fix for it yet, but basically:
I have 2 files that are modules and they use the same function names like install(), uninstall() etc etc which are used by the system.
When I include both the files at the same time for gathering data, I get a redeclare error. I want it so that I can include both and when the next file is loaded, it just rewrites over the previous function.
Or is there a way I can unset or clear the function? I've tried include, require, require_once etc... No work :(
In PHP it is not possible to overwrite a function that you have previously defined.
So the modules stand in each others way and one module prevents the other from working.
Actually Modules need to make use of the same named functions while they must be able to co-exist next to each other.
That can be done by moving the modules code into classes of their own. One module is one class then.
You can then define an interface with the functions your module classes must provide. As Modules therefore must have a streamlined interface - each module has a install() and uninstall() function for example - just define an object interface at first specifying those needed module functions:
module_definitions.php
interface Module {
public function install();
public function uninstall();
}
mod_Module1.php:
class Module1 implements Module {
public function install() {...}
public function uninstall() {...}
}
mod_Module2.php:
class Module2 implements Module {
public function install() {...}
public function uninstall() {...}
}
After doing so, whenever one of your routines needs to deal with any module, you can make that function require a module:
function module_install(Module $module) {
$module->install();
}
This function will only accept an existing module as a parameter. So you can not use your standard require/include for this but modules need to be instantiated prior use. You can put that into a module loader function as well:
function module_require($moduleName) {
$class = $moduleName;
if (!class_exists($class) {
$file = sprintf('mod_%s.php', $moduleName);
require $file;
if (!class_exists($class)) {
throw new DomainException(sprintf('Invalid Module File %s for Module %s.', $file, $moduleName));
}
}
}
How to access the modules functions then?
The only thing left is now to access the actual module.
You could the create a global array variable containing all modules:
// Define existing modules
$modules = array('Module1', 'Module2');
// Require the modules
array_map('module_require', $modules);
// instantiate each module:
$moduleInstances = array_map(function($module){return new $module;}, $modules);
// map modules name (key) to it's module instance:
$modules = array_combine($modules, $moduleInstances);
// access module by name:
$modules['Module1]->install();
However this has some problems. All modules need to be loaded at once for example, but you might not need to use all modules. Or imagine you would overwrite the global $modules array, all modules would be lost.
To prevent all that and allow more control and easier access to the modules, this can be put into a class of it's own that will take care of all the details. Like a register that knows which modules are loaded or not, registers them as needed.
For the following I assume a module can only exists once. If an object can only exist once this is often called a Singleton. So we'll wrap the management of loading and providing the module by it's name into a class of it's own that deals with the details:
class Modules {
private $modules = array();
private static $instance;
// singleton implementation for Modules manager
private static function getInstance() {
if (null === Modules::$instance) {
Modules::$instance = new Modules;
}
return Modules::$instance;
}
// singleton-like implementation for each Module
public function get($moduleName) {
if (!isset($this->modules[$moduleName]) {
module_require($moduleName);
$newModule = new $moduleName();
if (! $newModule instanceof Module) {
throw new DomainException(sprintf('Not a Module: %s', $moduleName));
}
$this->modules[$moduleName] = $newModule;
}
return $this->modules[$moduleName];
}
// get a module by name
public static function get($moduleName) {
return Modules::getInstance()->get($moduleName);
}
}
Put this class into module_definitions.php as well, which should be always included in your application.
So whenever you need to access a module you can do now by using the static get function with the name of the module:
Modules::get('Module1')->install();
Modules::get('Module2')->install();
No. You have a application design problem.
Rename the second function and call it on the locations you want the second to be used.
You cannot have two functions with the same name in the same scope.
If you have php5.3 or above, namespaces can be the answer: each plugin has its own, so the functions became
\plugin1\install()
\plugin2\install()
et cetera.
You may also wish to create unique classes inside these include files, then have them extend a generic class and use that generic class as a type to anchor to when you want to call up these functions at a higher level. You could also have one overload the other and then when you execute a method in one, it could be passed right on to the next.
Theoretically if you wrap the functions of each file in a separate class then you can call them both without problems. You don't even need to really worry about class state if you call them statically.
You cant use two time the same function name in the same namespace.
You should rename your second function or use namespaces like "Maerlyn" suggest
This problem can be solved by namespaces or/and static class.
Easiest way is to wrap these functions in class with static methods.
After that you'll be able not only to include them both, but also to use autoload-functions and forget about 'include'.
class Class1
{
public static function install()
{}
}
class Class2
{
public static function install()
{}
}
More about namespaces and autoload
i just got some more questions while learning PHP, does php implement any built in plugin system?
so the plugin would be able to change the behavior of the core component.
for example something like this works:
include 'core.class.php';
include 'plugin1.class.php';
include 'plugin2.class.php';
new plugin2;
where
core.class.php contains
class core {
public function coremethod1(){
echo 'coremethod1';
}
public function coremethod2(){
echo 'coremethod2';
}
}
plugin1.class.php contains
class plugin1 extends core {
public function coremethod1(){
echo 'plugin1method1';
}
}
plugin2.class.php contains
class plugin2 extends plugin1 {
public function coremethod2(){
echo 'plugin2method2';
}
}
This would be ideal, if not for the problem that now the plugins are dependable on each other, and removing one of the plugins:
include 'core.class.php';
//include 'plugin1.class.php';
include 'plugin2.class.php';
new plugin2;
breaks the whole thing...
are there any proper methods to doing this?
if there are not, them i might consider moving to a different langauge that supports this...
thanks for any help.
edit:
obviously it is my understanding that is lacking, so here is a
attempt at a clarification.
core.class.php contains anything...
plugin1.class.php contains anything...
plugin2.class.php contains anything...
include 'core.class.php';
include 'plugin1.class.php';
include 'plugin2.class.php';
$core = new core;
$core->coremethod1();//outputs plugin2method1
whereas:
include 'core.class.php';
include 'plugin2.class.php';
$core = new core;
$core->coremethod1();//outputs plugin1method1
I'm interested in any implementation, even one not involving classes
for example
include 'core.php';
//does core stuff
include 'core.php';
include 'plugin1';
//does extended core stuff
include 'core.php';
include 'plugin2';
//does extended core stuff
include 'core.php';
include 'plugin2';
include 'plugin1';
//does very extended core stuff
including a file needs to change the application behavior. for it to have any meaning.
I do not know what this is called either, so point me at the proper naming if there is any.
You are misusing the term "plugin". A plugin is generally a package of code that extends or alters the base functionality of a system - to make actual PHP plugins (which in the PHP world are called extensions) you'd be writing C or C++.
What you're describing here is merely including classes or class trees into the current execution for usage. And there is a way to bring them into the current execution context 'automatically', and that's via the autoload system.
If, after you've read the documentation on autoloading, you are still unsure of how to move forward, comment here and I will help you along.
EDIT
Ok, I see what you're after. You can't do exactly what you're after. When you execute new core; an instance of the class core will be returned - you can't modify that at all.
However, if you are willing to modify how you create instances of core, then I think I have something that could work for you, and it might look something like this.
class core {
public function coremethod1(){
echo 'coremethod1';
}
public function coremethod2(){
echo 'coremethod2';
}
/**
* #return core
*/
final public static function create()
{
// listed in order of preference
$plugins = array( 'plugin2', 'plugin1' );
foreach ( $plugins as $plugin )
{
if ( class_exists( $plugin ) )
{
return new $plugin();
}
}
return new self;
}
}
class plugin1 extends core {
public function coremethod1(){
echo 'plugin1method1';
}
}
class plugin2 extends plugin1 {
public function coremethod2(){
echo 'plugin2method2';
}
}
$core = core::create();
// test what we have
echo get_class( $core ), '<br>'
, $core->coremethod1(), '<br>'
, $core->coremethod2()
;
If your only concern is that not including plugin1 will create an error, then you can resort to autoloading to have plugin2 load plugin1 automatically:
From the comments in the PHP Manual on spl_autoload
// Your custom class dir
define('CLASS_DIR', 'class/')
// Add your class dir to include path
set_include_path(get_include_path().PATH_SEPARATOR.CLASS_DIR);
// You can use this trick to make autoloader look
// for commonly used "My.class.php" type filenames
spl_autoload_extensions('.class.php');
// Use default autoload implementation
spl_autoload_register();
If, however, you are looking for a traits/mixin-like feature, then the answer is no. PHP does not support this as of now. At least not without patching the core or resorting to these two APIs you do not want to use in production code.
The proper way to change how an object behaves at runtime would be to use Decorators:
$class = new BasicCache( new BasicValidators ( new Basic ) );
or Strategy patterns:
$class = new Basic;
$class->setStrategy(function() { return 'foo'} );
echo $class->callStrategy(); // foo
$class->setStrategy(function() { return 'bar'} );
echo $class->callStrategy(); // bar
See http://sourcemaking.com/design_patterns for the most common patterns.
EDIT Here is an example of how to create plugins with decorators. Assume, we have a game of some sort where some non-player characters walk around in a virtual space and greet the main character from time to time. That's all they do right now. We want some variation on how they greet though, which is why we need our plugins/decorators in this scenario.
First we create an interface that defines some methods any object able to greet should have. We don't care about what it does when these methods are invoked on a specific object. We just want to make sure that the methods are available and that they are called with a clearly defined input:
interface GreetInterface
{
public function greet($name);
public function setGreeting($greeting);
}
An interface is basically a contract any implementing object must fulfill. In our case, the contract says, if you are an object that can greet, you have to have two methods. Implement them any way you like, but have these methods.
Let's build our non-player character classes now, implementing this interface
class Dude implements GreetInterface
{
protected $greeting = 'hello';
public function greet($name)
{
return sprintf('%s %s', $this->greeting, $name);
}
public function setGreeting($greeting)
{
$this->greeting = $greeting;
return $this;
}
}
That's pretty straigtforward I guess. The Dude class just defines the two methods from the interface. When greet() is called, it will fetch the string stored in greeting and prepend to the param passed to the greet method. The setGreeting method allows us to change the greeting at runtime. Note: you could add a getter as well (I was just lazy)
Now on to the plugins. We will create an abstract GreetPlugin class to contain some shared boilerplate code, simply because we don't want to duplicate code in our actual plugins. The abstract plugin class will implement the GreetInterface, so we can make sure all subclasses implement the interface too.
Since Dude already implements the interface as well, we could have the plugins extend Dude, but that would be conceptually wrong, because extending creates an is-a relationship, but a plugin is not a Dude.
abstract class GreetPluginAbstract implements GreetInterface
{
protected $inner;
public function __construct(GreetInterface $inner)
{
$this->inner = $inner;
}
public function setGreeting($greeting)
{
$this->inner->setGreeting($greeting);
return $this;
}
public function greet($name)
{
return $this->inner->greet($name);
}
}
The plugin class accepts one argument when initialized: any class implementing the GreetInterface. The TypeHint makes sure, the class fulfills the contract. That's required, because, as you can see in the code, our plugins will need to call the methods in the interface on the class passed through the constructor. If we had extended from Dude, we would now be able to wrap dudes into dudes, which is a bit odd. Another reason for not doing it.
Now on to the first plugin. We want some of our dudes to speak with a fancy french accent, which means they use âccénts all over the place, but cannot pronounce a proper h. Disclaimer: yes, I know that's a cliche. Please bear with my examples
class FrenchPlugin extends GreetPluginAbstract
{
public function greet($name) {
return str_replace(array('h', 'e'), array('', 'é'),
$this->inner->greet($name));
}
}
Since the Plugin extends the abstract plugin, we can now focus on the actual code that modifies how a regular dude would do his greeting. When greet() is called, we call greet() on the wrapped element and then remove all h characters and turn all es into és. Everything else is unmodified abstract behavior.
In another plugin, we want to change the wording of the greeting, so we have some dudes say Heya, instead of just Hello. Just to add some variation.
class EasyGoingPlugin extends GreetPluginAbstract
{
protected $inner;
public function __construct(GreetInterface $inner) {
$this->inner = $inner->setGreeting('heya');
parent::__construct($inner);
}
}
This way we only override the constructor, because the greet method should just return whatever it will be. So we call the setGreeting method on the object passed to this plugin. Because the object has to implement the GreetInterface, we can be sure this works.
Note that I am assigning the return value of setGreeting as the inner object. This is possible because I return $this, whenever setMethod is called. This cannot be enforced through the interface, so you cannot rely on this form the interface. I just added it to show another technique: method chaining.
With two plugins done, we feel we have enough variation. Now we only need a convenient way to create Dudes. For that we create a small class like this:
class DudeBuilder
{
public static function build()
{
$dude = new Dude();
$decorators = func_get_args();
foreach($decorators as $decorator) {
$decorator .= "Plugin";
// require_once $decorator;
$dude = new $decorator($dude);
}
return $dude;
}
}
Note: I always mix up Builder and AbstractFactory, so if the above is a Factory, well, then it's a factory. Check out the design patterns links I gave earlier on ;)
All this Builder does, is create a regular dude and then wrap/decorate it into/with whatever plugins we tell it to use and than return it. Because the builder encapsulates no own state, we make the build method static.
For this example I assume you used the autoloading code I gave right on top. If not, you can include the plugin files in the foreach loop. Lazy loading them only when they are needed will give you a few microseconds faster load times over including them all on top. Hopefully, this also explains what I meant in the various comments when I argued the behavior should not be controlled by a file inclusion. The file inclusion is just a necessity. You cannot use a class that is not know to PHP. But that the class is actually used, is controlled by our code alone, by passing in the plugin names to the build method.
Let's do this now
$regularDude = DudeBuilder::build();
$frenchDude = DudeBuilder::build('French');
$easygoingDude = DudeBuilder::build('EasyGoing');
$frenchEasyGoingDude = DudeBuilder::build('French', 'EasyGoing');
This is effectively the same as doing:
$regularDude = new Dude;
$frenchDude = new FrenchPlugin(new Dude);
$easygoingDude = new EasyGoingPlugin(new Dude);
$frenchEasyGoingDude = new FrenchPlugin(new EasyGoingPlugin(new Dude));
With just two plugins, we can now create three types of Dudes. Let's have them greet you:
echo $regularDude->greet('Yuri'), PHP_EOL,
$frenchDude->greet('Yuri'), PHP_EOL,
$easygoingDude->greet('Yuri'), PHP_EOL,
$frenchEasyGoingDude->greet('Yuri'), PHP_EOL;
// gives
hello Yuri
éllo Yuri
heya Yuri
éya Yuri
We can now create additional plugins to decorate our basic classes with. If for some reason, you decide your game should have talking horses or cars as well, you could also create a class Car or Horse and have it implement the greet interface too and add a Builder for them. You can then reuse the plugins to create French EasyGoing Cars or Horses.
PHP core can be extended with PECL extensions (which are C++, I believe).
Core functions can be overridden (if you have the APD PECL extension installed) with override_function
User functions can be executed with call_user_func.
Maybe if you could explain what you are planning, we'd be able to offer a better answer?
Your code is breaking because plugin2 extends plugin1, and you're not including the plugin1 class. Why not make class plugin2 extend core? That seems to be what you're going for.