I am trying to add functions to class from a separate file, I wonder if this could be possible!
$mClass = new MyClass();
$mClass->new_Functions[0](10); // Is there a way to have it in this form?
class myClass
{
private $Pvar = 5;
$new_Fcuntions;
function __construct()
{
include('additional.functions.php');
$arr = get_defined_functions();
$this->new_Functions = $arr['user'];
// trying to call the function with parameter 10
call_user_func(array($this, $this->new_Functions[0]), 10);
}
}
[additional.functions.php] file
function operate($y)
{
return $this->Pvar * $y;
}
----- Edited ------- as it wasn't clear!
"additional.functions.php" is a module and there will be multiple modules to be added to the application, and every module could have more than single function and modules could call one another!
additional.functions.php [module file]
function operate($y)
{
return $this->Pvar * $y;
}
function do-more($foo)
{
return $this->operate(20) + $foo;
}
another.functions.php [another module]
function do-another($foo)
{
return $this->do-more(30) - $foo;
}
function add($foo, $bar)
{
return $foo + $bar;
}
appreciate every participation, its been a while since I am trying to maneuver around with it!
Is this possible or should I give up!
It looks to me like you are looking for Traits, which are a new feature as of PHP 5.4.0. Using traits, you can have snippets of code "mixed in" to other classes, a concept known as "horizontal reuse".
If you are not looking for traits, it's possible that you could do what you wanted with Runkit, however I would suggest staying as far away from it as possible, if you are not genuinely interested in PHP internals as well.
In any event, whatever you are trying to do is very interesting
I got it to work with dependency injection. The pvar has to be public or create a __get method to return the private variable. I also used the function name because it seems cleaner to me to use it via name rather than it's position in the list but if you want to keep that then just put $key where you see $value from the line: $this->function_list[$value] = ...
function operate($y, $that)
{
return $that->Pvar * $y;
}
class Example {
public $function_list = array();
private $Pvar = 5;
public function __construct()
{
$list = get_defined_functions();
$that = $this;
foreach ($list['user'] as $key => $value) {
$this->function_list[$value] = function() use ($value, $that) {
print call_user_func_array($value, array_merge(func_get_args(), array($that )));
};
}
}
public function __get($key)
{
if (isSet($this->$key)) {
return $this->$key;
} else {
throw new \Exception('Key "'.$key.'" does not exist');
}
}
}
$Ex = new Example();
$Ex->function_list['operate'](10);
If you want to extend MyClass from your modules (and not to initialize it, like in your example code), than you could do it in a way like this:
<?php
namespace modules\MyModuleA;
class MyClassExtension
{
private $MyObject;
public function __construct(\MyClass $MyObject)
{
$this->MyObject = $MyObject;
}
public function doSomething($anyParameter)
{
return $this->MyObject->doSomethingElse($anyParameter * 5, 42, 'foo');
}
}
And MyClass:
<?php
class MyClass extends \Extensible
{
// some code
}
abstract class Extensible
{
private $extensions = [];
public function extend($extension)
{
$this->extensions[] = $extension;
}
public function __call($methodName, $parameters)
{
foreach ($this->extensions as $Extension) {
if (in_array($methodName, get_class_methods($Extension))
return call_user_func_array([$Extension, $methodName], $parameters);
}
throw new \Exception('Call to undefined method ' . $methodName . '...');
}
public function hasExtension($extensionName)
{
return in_array($this->extensions, $extensionName);
}
}
And put it all together:
<?php
$moduleNames = ['MyModuleA', 'MyModuleB'];
$MyObject = new \MyClass;
foreach ($moduleNames as $moduleName) {
$className = '\\modules\\' . $moduleName . '\\MyClassExtension';
$module = new $className($MyObject);
$MyObject->extend($module);
}
// Now you can call a method, that has been added by MyModuleA:
$MyObject->doSomething(10);
You should add an interface for the extension classes of course...
The problem is: What happens if any code in your application calls a method of $MyObject, that is not there, because the module has not been loaded. You would always have to check if ($MyObject->hasExtension('ModuleA')) { ... }, but, of course, the application shouldn't be aware of any module. So I would not design an application in such a way.
I would suggest to use traits (mix-ins). See PHP reference
If you can have another class in that file instead of file with functions
- the best solution will be Traits
http://php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.traits.php
or using inheritance
If you move that code to class you can avoid a lot of unnecessary code. I mean:
include('additional.functions.php');
$arr = get_defined_functions();
$this->new_Functions = $arr['user'];
// trying to call the function with parameter 10
call_user_func(array($this, $this->new_Functions[0]), 10);
It'll be e.g.:
class myClass extends MyBaseClassWithMyAwesomeFunctions
{
private $Pvar = 5;
}
Maybe this approach helps you:
In the files with the additional functions, don't define named functions, but return a closure, that expects (at least) the object (instance of MyClass) as parameter:
<?php
// additional.functions.php
return function ($myObject) {
$Object->multiplyPvar($myObject->getTheNumber());
$Object->doSomethingElse(42, 'foo');
};
The client, that builds MyClass collects those functions from the files into the array:
<?php
$files = [
'/path/to/my/additional.functions1.php',
'/path/to/my/additional.functions2.php'
];
$initFunctions = [];
foreach ($files as $path)
$initFunctions[] = include $path;
$MyObject = new \MyClass($initFunctions);
The constructor then calls those functions:
<?php
class MyClass
{
public function __construct(array $additionalInitFunctions)
{
foreach ($additionalInitFunctions as $additionalInitFunction)
$additionalInitializerFunction($this); // you can also add parameters of course
}
}
This way the class keeps very well testable as well as the function files. Maybe this could help you in any way. You should never ever think about modifying the internal (private) state of an object directly from any code from outside of the class. This is not testable! Think about writing tests before you implement your code (called "test driven development"). You will see, it is not possible to test a class, if you allow any code outside of that class to modify the internal (private) state of the class instance. And you don't want to have this. If you change some internal implementation detail in your class without breaking the unit test of that class, you will anyways probably break some code in any of your additional.functions.php files and no test will tell you: "Hey: you've broken something right now".
Related
I'm self-studying the PHP language. And I'm focused on the latest PHP OOP language.
I search for some "ready-to-install" PHP software and as I scan for some references to search and know, I saw lines of code with a structure like this (can't remember so I'll create my own):
$myapp->settings->getValue('openforum');
$myapp->settings->setValue('closeformaintenance', '1');
So my question is, how can I reproduce the code above? I don't know what term to use that line of code (objects, I guess?).
Something like this:
$newLogin->search($uid)->setLogin($dateToday);
Like that. I really need to do that way so I can organize my coding structure. Thanks by the way.
And also for the final question, IS THAT POSSIBLE?
Here's a fairly straight forward way of looking at it, using dependency injection.
Try it out: https://3v4l.org/iSJgL
Note, the below requires PHP 7 due to the string type hint. Remove that and I believe it should work in 5.6 just fine.
<?php
$myapp = new MyApp(new SettingsBag([
'works' => false,
'random' => rand(),
]));
var_dump($myapp->settings()->get('random'));
var_dump($myapp->settings()->get('works'));
// Let's change it up...
$myapp->settings()->set('works', true);
// Now it should be true.
var_dump($myapp->settings()->get('works'));
These would normally have namespaces like \App and/or \App\Configuration, but I ignore that here so it's easier to follow:
class MyApp {
private $settings_bag = null;
function __construct(SettingsBag $settings_bag)
{
$this->settings_bag = $settings_bag;
}
public function settings()
{
return $this->settings_bag;
}
}
class SettingsBag {
private $settings = null;
function __construct(array $settings = [])
{
$this->settings = $settings;
}
public function set(string $key, $value)
{
return $this->settings[$key] = $value;
}
public function get(string $key)
{
return $this->settings[$key];
}
}
What you try to achieve is called method chaining. You can get this by the following:
<?php
class TestClass {
private $val = '';
public function test1($val) {
$this->val = $val;
return $this;
}
public function test2() {
echo 'Hello '.$this->val;
}
}
$test->test1('World')->test2(); // Hello World
You have simply to return the instance of the object on the method to allow the method chaining.
You can read more here.
It's method chaining.
See code below:
class T {
public function test() {
// do something
return $this;
}
}
$x = new T;
$x->test()->test();
I'm looking for more comfortable/more short version of Switch() statement in case of using multiple functions.
I'll give you one example: imagine 100-200 functions in one class, and you want to call only one of them by setting value to id in that class.
In my particular case, I have the following structure of PHP file:
<?php
class _main
{
function request($id)
{
switch($id)
{
case 0:
$this->writeA();
break;
case 1:
$this->writeB();
break;
///...
// then we have 100-200 functions like this in switch.
}
}
function writeA()
{
echo('a');
}
function writeB()
{
echo('b');
}
}
$id = 1;
$x = new _main();
$x->request($id);
?>
For some of you it may seem weird, but I don't want to have that much lines of code with case and break. For me, they are just making code more difficult to read.
(by the way, writing it 100 times will not making it fun for me too).
CONCLUSION
What could be the best,fast and comfortable method?
Can I store functions to array and then call them?
And will it affect performance? Will be Swicth() even faster?
Thank you :)
EDIT
Perhaps there is a different way of thinking/coding and not only array/switch thing.
I can't say I would ever recommend this but if you really want that many methods within a single class and a singular function to route the calls through...
<?php
class MyClass
{
public $id;
public function callFunction()
{
$funcName = 'execute' . $this->id;
return $this->$funcName();
}
private function execute1()
{
echo 'execute1() Called.';
}
private function execute2()
{
echo 'execute2() Called.';
}
}
$c = new MyClass();
$c->id = 1;
$c->callFunction();
Output:
execute1() Called.
I feel like there is most likely another way to approach this with more information utilising Interfaces and Abstract classes, but with the information to go off the above might suffice your requirement.
Edit: Sadly I don't have the time right now to come up with a detailed solution, and I don't really have enough information to go off but perhaps utilising interfaces is your best solution for your requirement. Below is a very quick example.
<?php
interface WritableInterface
{
public function write($data);
}
class VersionOneWriter implements WritableInterface
{
public function write($data)
{
return $data . '<br/>';
}
}
class VersionTwoWriter implements WritableInterface
{
public function write($data)
{
return $data . $data . '<br/>';
}
}
class MyMainClass
{
public function request(WritableInterface $writer, $data)
{
return $writer->write($data);
}
}
$c = new MyMainClass();
$w1 = new VersionOneWriter();
$w2 = new VersionTwoWriter();
echo $c->request($w1, 'DataString');
echo $c->request($w2, 'DataString');
Essentially when you call your request function you pass along a Writer class which implements the WritableInterface. Anything that implements that interface has to have a write() method.
Now when you pass your data across with your method, since you are also passing a writer along that can handle the data you can safely call ->write($data) within your request() method and the result will be dependent on the class you passed through.
If you ever need another method of writing you can just add create another class that implements your interface
Hopefully that made some sense, it was a bit of a ramble as I have to disappear for a bit. If you have any questions I'll try to check back when I have time.
--
Edit2:
The define() in this instance requires PHP7+ since I'm defining an array, but you could prior to PHP7 you could just use a standard array. $classMap = ['FirstClass', 'SecondClass'];
interface MyInterface {}
class FirstClass implements MyInterface {}
class SecondClass implements MyInterface {}
$requestParam = 1;
define('CLASS_MAP', array(
'FirstClass',
'SecondClass',
));
$classMap = CLASS_MAP[$requestParam]; // SecondClass
$class = new $classMap;
var_dump($class); // Dumps out: object(SecondClass)#1 (0) {}
I need an idea to create anonymous class on PHP. I don't know how I can works.
See my limitations:
On PHP you can't make anonymous class, like anonymous function (like class {});
On PHP you don't have class scope (except in namespaces, but it have the same problem below);
On PHP you can't use variables to specify the class name (like class $name {});
I don't have access to install the runkit PECL.
What I need, and why:
Well, I need create a function called ie create_class() that receives a key name and a anonymous class. It'll be useful for me because I want use different name class symbols that PHP can't accept. For instance:
<?php
create_class('it.is.an.example', function() {
return class { ... }
});
$obj = create_object('it.is.an.example');
?>
So, I need an idea that accept this use. I need it because on my framework I have this path: /modules/site/_login/models/path/to/model.php. So, the model.php need to declare a new class called site.login/path.to.model.
On call create_object() if the internal cache have a $class definition (like it.is.an.example it simply return the new class object. If not, need load. So I will use the $class content to search fastly what is the class file.
In PHP 7.0 there will be anonymous classes. I don't fully understand your question, but your create_class() function might look like this:
function create_class(string $key, array &$repository) {
$obj = new class($key) {
private $key;
function __construct($key) {
$this->key = $key;
}
};
$repository[$key] = $obj;
return $obj;
}
This will instantiate an object with an anonymous class type and register it into the $repository. To get an object out you use the key you created it with: $repository['it.is.an.example'].
You can create a dummy class using stdClass
$the_obj = new stdClass();
So basically you want to implement a factory pattern.
Class Factory() {
static $cache = array();
public static getClass($class, Array $params = null) {
// Need to include the inc or php file in order to create the class
if (array_key_exists($class, self::$cache) {
throw new Exception("Class already exists");
}
self::$cache[$class] = $class;
return new $class($params);
}
}
public youClass1() {
public __construct(Array $params = null) {
...
}
}
Add a cache within to check for duplicates
If you really need to to that, you could use eval()
$code = "class {$className} { ... }";
eval($code);
$obj = new $className ();
But the gods won't approve this. You will go to hell if you do it.
I'm trying to whip up a skeleton View system in PHP, but I can't figure out how to get embedded views to receive their parent's variables. For example:
View Class
class View
{
private $_vars=array();
private $_file;
public function __construct($file)
{
$this->_file='views/'.$file.'.php';
}
public function set($var, $value=null)
{
if (is_array($var))
{
$this->_vars=array_merge($var, $this->_vars);
}
else
$this->_vars[$var]=$value;
return $this;
}
public function output()
{
if (count($this->_vars))
extract($this->_vars, EXTR_REFS);
require($this->_file);
exit;
}
public static function factory($file)
{
return new self($file);
}
}
test.php (top level view)
<html>
<body>
Hey <?=$name?>! This is <?=$adj?>!
<?=View::factory('embed')->output()?>
</body>
</html>
embed.php (embedded in test.php
<html>
<body>
Hey <?=$name?>! This is an embedded view file!!
</body>
</html>
Code:
$vars=array(
'name' => 'ryan',
'adj' => 'cool'
);
View::factory('test')->set($vars)->output();
Output:
Hey ryan! This is cool! Hey [error for $name not being defined]
this is an embedded view file!!
The problem is the variables I set in the top level view do not get passed to the embedded view. How could I make that happen?
So, I'm not exactly answering your question, but here's my super-simple hand-grown template system. It supports what you're trying to do, although the interface is different.
// Usage
$main = new SimpleTemplate("templating/html.php");
$main->extract($someObject);
$main->extract($someArray);
$main->name = "my name";
$subTemplate = new SimpleTemplate("templating/another.php");
$subTemplate->parent($main);
$main->placeholderForAnotherTemplate = $subTemplate->run();
echo $main; // or $main->run();
// html.php
<html><body><h1>Title <?= $name ?></h1><p><?= $placeHolderForAnotherTemplate ?></p></body></html>
<?php
// SimpleTemplate.php
function object_to_array($object)
{
$array = array();
foreach($object as $property => $value)
{
$array[$property] = $value;
}
return $array;
}
class SimpleTemplate
{
public $source;
public $path;
public $result;
public $parent;
public function SimpleTemplate($path=false, $source=false)
{
$this->source = array();
$this->extract($source);
$this->path($path);
}
public function __toString()
{
return $this->run();
}
public function extract($source)
{
if ($source)
{
foreach ($source as $property => $value)
{
$this->source[$property] = $value;
}
}
}
public function parent($parent)
{
$this->parent = $parent;
}
public function path($path)
{
$this->path = $path;
}
public function __set($name, $value)
{
$this->source[$name] = $value;
}
public function __get($name)
{
return isset($this->source[$name]) ? $this->source[$name] : "";
}
public function mergeSource()
{
if (isset($this->parent))
return array_merge($this->parent->mergeSource(), $this->source);
else
return $this->source;
}
public function run()
{
ob_start();
extract ($this->mergeSource());
include $this->path;
$this->result = ob_get_contents();
ob_end_clean();
return $this->result;
}
}
well, you create a new instance of the class, so there are no variables defined in the embedded template. you should try to copy the object, rather than creating a new one.
edit: I'm talking about the factory method
The main issue is that your views have no direct knowledge of each other. By calling this:
<?=View::factory('embed')->output()?>
in your "parent" view, you create and output a template that has no knowledge of the fact that it is inside another template.
There are two approaches I could recommend here.
#1 - Associate your templates.
By making your embedded templates "children" of a parent template, you could allow them to have access to the parent's variables at output() time. I utilize this approach in a View system I built. It goes something like this:
$pView = new View_Parent_Class();
$cView = new View_Child_Class();
$pView->addView($cView);
At $pview->render() time, the child view is easily given access to the parent's variables.
This method might require a lot of refactoring for you, so I'll leave out the dirty details, and go into the second approach.
#2 - Pass the parent variables
This would probably be the easiest method to implement given the approach you've taken so far. Add an optional parameter to your output method, and rewrite it slightly, like this:
public function output($extra_vars = null)
{
if (count($this->_vars))
extract($this->_vars, EXTR_REFS);
if (is_array($extra_vars)) extract($extra_vars, EXTR_REFS);
require($this->_file);
exit;
}
If you add a simple getter method as well:
public function get_vars()
{
return $this->_vars;
}
Then you can embed your files with what is effectively read-access to the parent's variables:
<?=View::factory('embed')->output($this->get_vars())?>
$this will be a reference to the current template, ie. the parent. Note that you can have variable name collisions via this method because of the two extract calls.
You could make your $_vars property static, not particularly elegant, but would work for what you are trying to achieve.
On a side note... your array_merge() in the set() function is wrong, swap your 2 variables around.
First thing i want to say that it's not an easy question to explain, so please be patient if it seems confusing.
I have a set of classes like this
class Product {
public static $static_type = 'product';
public static $static_table = 'product_table';
public function __construct($params) { //do some }
}
and then there are the classes News, Events etc
From another class i need to access to those static variables inside these classes in an iterative way. Something like:
//...
if (Product::$static_type) { //do some }
else if (News::$static_type) { //do other }
//...
I want to trasform it in a cycle, like foreach in a way like this (it's not correct but makes sense to my question)
foreach ($classes as $class) {
echo $class::$static_type; //brrrr, just to render the idea :)
}
So i think about a singleton/static class that has a static method returning an array of my classes (not instantiated). Like this:
class Conf {
public function __construct() {
//nothing
}
public static function get_class_array () {
//how to do this???
}
}
and then
foreach (Conf::get_class_array() as $class) {
echo $class::$static_type; //brrrr, just to render the idea :)
}
How i can reach this? I don't want to instantiate Product, News or others in this case.
Edit: eval is evil, i don't want to use it. No tricks with get_declared_class, if there's no way to solve I will use reflection, that i think it's the more elegant way among the mentioned :(.
Edit: in the meantime i'll do the Conf::get_class_array() in this way
public static function get_class_array () {
return array(new ReflectionClass('Prodotto'), new ReflectionClass('News'));
}
and then call it here:
foreach (Conf::get_class_array() as $class) {
echo $class->getStaticPropertyValue('static_type');
}
I don't think you can do this. You could however do one of these:
$properties = get_class_vars('Product');
echo $properties['static_type'];
or
$class = new ReflectionClass('product');
echo $class->getStaticPropertyValue('static_type');
Note that in PHP 5.3 echo $class::$static_type; will work (http://php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.static.php)
Until 5.3.0, you can try this method. Create a container class as you suggested (we'll call it Conf to stick with what you had), and provide two methods for setting and getting applicable classes that you want to iterate over:
<?php
class Conf {
private static $instance;
private $classes = array();
public static function getInstance() {
if ( is_null(self::$instance) ) {
self::$instance = new self();
}
return self::$instance;
}
public function registerClass($className) {
// Use associative index to maintain uniqueness
$this->classes[$className] = $className;
}
public function getRegisteredClasses() {
return $this->classes;
}
}
Some example classes and how to register them:
class X {
public static $a = "catus";
public static $b = "pants";
}
class Y {
public static $a = "apples";
public static $b = "bananers";
}
$conf = Conf::getInstance();
$conf->registerClass("X");
$conf->registerClass("Y");
Now, to access and/or alter the static members, you can do something like the following (using RefelectionClass as tom Haigh pointed out):
$conf = Conf::getInstance();
echo "<pre>";
foreach ( $conf->getRegisteredClasses() as $class ) {
$reflection = new ReflectionClass($class);
echo "<hr/>Class: $class\n";
// Access example
print_r( $reflection->getStaticProperties() );
// Alter example
$reflection->setStaticPropertyValue("a",
$reflection->getStaticPropertyValue("a") . "-modified"
);
print_r( $reflection->getStaticProperties() );
}
If you have a class naming convention like Com_Example_Static_X and Com_Example_Static_Y, you can simplify Conf->getRegisteredClasses() (and even make it a static method if you so desire) by doing as n3rd suggested:
class Conf {
// ....
static public function getMatchingClasses($pattern="/^Com_Example_Static_.+$/") {
$response = array();
foreach ( get_declared_classes() as $className ) {
if ( preg_match($pattern, $className, $m) ) {
$response[] = $className;
}
}
return $response;
}
}
And, of course, update your foreach to:
foreach ( Conf::getMatchingClasses() as $class ) {
// ...
}
Hope that was helpful.
You can use get_declared_classes() to get a list of classes. This will be all class though, not just the ones you've declared.
You should make all your classes inherit from a base class:
class Product extends MyBase {}
Then you can list the classes like this
function get_class_array()
{
$myClasses = array();
foreach (get_declared_classes as $class)
{
if (is_subclass_of($class, 'MyBase'))
$myClasses[] = $class;
}
return $myClasses;
}
Then you can get the data like this:
foreach (get_class_array() as $class)
echo eval("return $class::\$foo;"); // Yes yes, eval is evil, we know...
To get a list of classes, you can use get_declared_classes. Then you'll have to determine which of those classes you want to process.
You could do this by looking for a common base class with is_subclass_of, or using ReflectionClass to see if it has the static member variables you are interested in.
I don't think there's an easy way to do this. Here are a few ideas off the top of my head how you could go about doing this:
Use get_declared_classes() to retrieve a list of all defined classes and check them against your naming scheme (e.g. MyNamespace_*) or whether they implement an interface (e.g. MyStaticEnumerable).
Kinda like the above, but a little more sophisticated: write your on class loader and have it check whether a loaded class is one of ones you want to enumerate. If so, make it known to some manager class.
Check the directory in which the classes are defined to manually enumerate all classes.