With learning fuelPHP, I am introduced on calling classes using scope resolution, or :: in sense. Typically, when we call a method in a class we do this ...
$myclass = new myclass();
$myclass->mymethod();
On fuel, methods are usually called in this manner ...
myclass::mymethod();
I was wondering if there are any difference between the two? Is the scope resolution is something of an update on 5.3 as well ... if not, which one is ideal, or when should I use these.
Thanks.
The scope resolution operator is used to access either class constants like ::const, static variables like ::$var or call static methods like ::method().
See http://php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.static.php
Static methods can be called without having an instance of the class they are defined in. They're defined in that class with the static keyword.
For example, one of CakePHP's static methods is defined like this:
class ClassRegistry {
// ...
public static function &getInstance() {
// ...
}
}
... which you can call like ClassRegistry::getInstance().
Without the static keyword, you'd need an instance of the ClassRegistry class to call that function.
You can read more here, especially about why using static methods in your own code can sometimes be a bad idea: http://kore-nordmann.de/blog/0103_static_considered_harmful.html
I am not sure how would myclass::mymethod(); work, since I use such syntax only when I am calling a STATIC class.
MyClass::DoSomething();
would call a static method named DoSomething()
while
$instance = new MyClass();
$instance->DoSomething();
would call the instance method.
I have not tested it but I believe you will run into an error if you do $instance::DoSomething()
I think the best way to understand why there is a static call and what it does behind the scene is to check this FuelPHP blog's entry: http://fuelphp.com/blog/2011/05/why-did-you-do-that
The obvious difference is that the first solution $myObject->myMethod() it's a dynamic call : you need an instance to execute myMethod().
In the second solution, MyClass::myMethod() is a static call. The class acts as a sort of namespace where a function belong. You don't need an instance for that.
Related
PHP allows use of static member functions and variables, since 5.3 including late static bindings:
class StaticClass {
public static $staticVar;
...
}
$o = new StaticClass();
Currently, there are various options to access those static members:
$o->staticVar; // as instance variable/ function
$o::staticVar; // as class variable/ function
Other options exist for accessing members from inside the class:
self::$staticVar; // explicitly showing static usage of variable/ function
static::$staticVar; // allowing late static binding
Restructuring some existing classes that make some use of static members I've asked myself if there are best practices for working with static members in PHP?
Well, obviously, they all do different things.
$o->staticVar
This is invalid, since you cannot/should not access static properties with the instance property syntax.
StaticClass::$staticVar
This very plainly accesses a specific static variable on a very specific class.
$o::$staticVar
This accesses the static variable on the class that $o is an instance of. It's mostly used as a shorthand for the previous method and is equivalent in all respects. Obviously though, which class is used exactly depends on what class $o is an instance of.
self::$staticVar
This can be used only inside a class, and will always refer to the class that it's written in. It's a good idea to use this inside a class instead of StaticClass::$staticVar if the class refers to itself, since you don't need to worry about anything if you change the class name later. E.g.:
class Foo {
protected static $bar = 42;
public function baz() {
self::$bar; // good
Foo::$bar // the same, but should be avoided because it repeats the class name
}
}
static::$staticVar
This can also only be used inside a class and is basically the same as self above, but resolves with late static binding and may hence refer to a child class.
What the "best practice" is is debatable. I'd say you should always be as specific as necessary, but no more. $o::$staticVar and static::$staticVar both allow the class to vary through child classes, while self::$staticVar and StaticClass::$staticVar do not. Following the open/closed principle, it's a good idea to use the former, more variable method to allow for extensions.
Properties, both static and non-static, should also not be public to not break encapsulation.
Also see How Not To Kill Your Testability Using Statics.
First of all, don't use $this->staticVar. I am unsure when this changed (I believe PHP 5.4), but in recent versions it is no longer possible to retrieve static variables this way.
As for using late static binding, don't use it if you don't need it. The reason to use it would be if you plan to use inheritance and expect to change the value of the static variable in a derived class.
I have a child class that extends a class with only static methods. I would like to make this child class a singleton rather than static because the original developer really wanted a singleton but used static instead (obvious because every method in the static class calls the Init() function (basically a constructor)).
Most of the methods in the parent don't need to be overwritten in the child, but I would like to avoid having to write methods like this:
public function Load($id)
{
return parent::Load($id);
}
when I would prefer not to overwrite the method at all and just use:
$child->Load($id);
Is it possible to call a static method non-statically? Is it possible to extend a static object with an instance object? I know I can try it and it will likely work (PHP is very forgiving), but I don't know if there is anything I should be concerned about.
Can you inherit static methods?
Yes
Can you override static methods?
Yes, but only as of PHP 5.3 do they work as you would expect: http://www.php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.static.php (ie. self binds to the actual class and not the class it's defined in).
Is it possible to call a static method non-statically?
Yes, but will lose $this. You don't get a warning (yet) but there also isn't really a reason to call it the wrong way.
Two part answer.
First, about the titular question: calling a static method non-statically is perfectly fine; #SamDark's comment is correct. It does not produce a warning, nor does it cause any kitten murdering. Try it:
<?php
class test {
public static function staticwarnings(){
echo "YOU ARE (statically) WARNED!\n";
}
}
error_reporting(E_ALL);
$test = new test();
echo "\n\ncalling static non-statically\n";
$test->staticwarnings();
If you had an instance reference, $this, in that static method, then you would get a fatal error. But that is true regardless of how you call it.
Once again, there isn't a warning, nor any kitten killed.
Second part of the answer:
Calling an overridden parent function from an overriding child class requires something called "scope resolution". What the OP is doing in their method is NOT calling a static method. (Or at least, it doesn't have to be; we can't see the parent implementation). The point is, using the parent keyword is not a static call. Using the :: operator on an explicit parent class name is also not a static call, if it is used from an extending class.
Why is that documentation link so strangely named? It's literally Hebrew. If you've ever run into an error related to it, you might have observed the delightfully-named parser error code T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM.
I'm studying this code:
http://www.w3style.co.uk/a-lightweight-and-flexible-front-controller-for-php-5
In it the author uses a static function to instantiate a class. I'm basically a beginner and I had never seen this. Why would one use a static instantiator rather than the usual constructor?
Here is the code:
index.php
<?php
define("PAGE_DIR", dirname(__FILE__) . "/pages");
require_once "FrontController.php";
FrontController::createInstance()->dispatch();
FrontController.php
<?php
class FrontController {
public static function createInstance() {
if (!defined("PAGE_DIR")) {
exit("Critical error: Cannot proceed without PAGE_DIR.");
}
$instance = new self();
return $instance;
}
public function dispatch() {....}
This is a workaround for PHP, since it is too dumb for stuff like this:
(new SomeClass())->doSomething();
Oneliners like that are impossible in native PHP. That is why some people wrap the instantiation of the class in a static method to make it possible:
SomeClass::create()->doSomething();
It helps to keep the scope clean, since you do not need extra variables. It would look like this, otherwise:
$instance = new SomeClass();
$instance->doSomething();
unset($instance);
EDIT: let me quote Gordon here (from the comments): "Static calls are the same as putting a function into the global scope. Calling it will always have a dependency on the global scope." You should be aware of this fact, as it makes your code less flexible.
The most common situations are where you want to create a singleton instance, or using a factory pattern.
PHP only allows one constructor, which means if you want to have more than one way to construct an object, mutliple static function are considered a valid solution. However, just having a static function that calls the constructor doesn't seem to make much sense.
For example, you could have a constructor that takes parameters for each property of the object. And a static function which takes just an id, and does a database call to retrieve all the properties to retrieve the object. This means you don't have to have all the database procedures in your calling code. The static function takes responsibility.
It is often suggested to make a seperate Factory class to do this, but I don't think that always makes sense. You should read in on the subject before making a decision if it makes sense for you.
i'm php coder, trying to get into python world, and it's very hard for me.
Biggest enjoy of static methods in php is automatic builder of instance. No need to declare object, if you needed it once, in every file (or with different constructor params , in one line)
<?php
class Foo {
function __constructor__(){
$this->var = 'blah';
}
public static function aStaticMethod() {
return $this->var;
}
}
echo Foo::aStaticMethod();
?>
we can call constructor from static method don't we? and we can access everything in class as it would be simple method ... we can even have STATIC CONSTRUCTOR in php class and call it like so: Object::construct()->myMethod(); (to pass different params every time)
but not in python???? #staticmethod makes method in class a simple function that doesn't see totally anything ??
class socket(object):
def __init__(self):
self.oclass = otherclass()
print 'test' # does this constructor called at all when calling static method??
#staticmethod
def ping():
return self.oclass.send('PING') # i can't access anything!!!
print Anidb.ping()
I can't access anything from that god damned static method, it's like a standalone function or something like this..??
Maybe I'm using the wrong decorator? Maybe there's something like php offers with static methods in python?
1) Please tell why static methods is isolated
2) Please tell me how to make the same behavior like php static methods have.
3) Please tell me alternative practical use of this, if php static methods behavior is a bad thing
P.s. the goal of all this to write totally less code as much as possible.
P.p.s Heavy commenting of sample code is appreciated
Thank you.
static methods in PHP are not as you believe, they can't access to instance members. No $this! with them.
<?php
class Foo {
public static $var = 'foo ';
function __construct(){
echo 'constructing ';
$this->var = 'blah ';
}
public function aMethod() {
return $this->var;
}
public static function aStaticMethod() {
#return $this->$var; -> you can't do that,
# $this can be accessed only in instance methods, not static
return self::$var;
}
}
$foo = new Foo();
echo $foo->aMethod();
echo Foo::aStaticMethod();
?>
Python has three kind of methods in objects static methods are like functions defined ouside classes, the only use to put them in object is to keep them with the class as helper functions. class methods can access only to variables defined in the class (decorator #classmethod). This is more or less what PHP calls static members or methods. The first parameter of such methods sould be cls, and content of class can be accessed through cls. Normal methods must get self as first parameter and are the only ones to be able to access to instance members.
If you want several objects of the same type you definitely need instances, and the other types are not what you are looking for. If you only have one instance of an object, you could use class methods instead (or PHP static methods).
But in most case you should not bother doing that if you don't know why and just stick with instances of objects and normal methods, doing otherwise is premature optimization and your code is likely to bite you later because of the many restrictions you introduce.
You want classmethod instead. That provides the class as the first argument.
EDIT:
class C(object):
foo = 42
#classmethod
def printfoo(cls):
print cls.foo
C.printfoo()
I see you've already accepted another answer, but I'm not sure that it will work with your code. Specifically, the oclass variable is only created for instances of the class, not for the class itself. You could do it like this:
class socket(object):
oclass = otherclass()
#classmethod
def ping(cls):
return cls.oclass.send('PING')
socket.ping()
However, using your existing code and removing all decorators, you could simply instantiate it and use a method on the same line:
socket().ping()
What is better to use in this context, static methods, or simple public method and call them always like this: $request = new Request();
if($request->isPostRequest()){ do smth }
ofcourse its easier to use static, but what is more properly to use?
Class Request {
public static function isSecureConnection() {}
public static function isPostRequest() {}
public static function isAjaxRequest() {}
...etc
}
If each Request is a genuine entity, then it would be better to use non-static members. But if it's not and methods are used in general, like Sinus function in math, then they'd be better to be static.
Overall it'd be better to declare static functions in a class that is just consisted of functions and no data members.
You should always create a class like if it was to be used on a non-static environment.
Then you can use that as a Singleton with lazy-instantiation. Or even as a Static class instantiation. Or even as a Standalone instance object. You decide later what to do with it.
If you start by declaring all members as static you are basically just covering a bunch of Global variables inside a glorified namespace known as a Class. You also will statically allocate the memory used by that class even if you don't call it or use it in your code.
So, just write as a Class, then you decide what to do with it. Static/Non-Static. Singleton/Instance. Factory Pattern or not. Memory Allocator X/DLL bound or whatnot.
The only exception is static members used for book-keeping in behalf of the Object Instances; things like reference counting, caches and things like that. That is the good thing about static/non-static, you can mix and match for some clever behaviors.
What if later you wanted another Request? Or what would happen if you can create more than one because you are in a multithreaded environment? Things will get really strange once you go that route with statics.
It looks like you are handling one particular request.
Now this insinuates you should make it a singleton, and/or use static functions.
Reason:
There is only one request, all the state is defined by the environment delivered to the process. The class methods are just helper functions, and you want to be able to use them without class instance.
On the other hand, you would rarely use static functions with classes that represent one of many, for example one user of many, one question of many.
Declaring class properties or methods as static makes them accessible without needing an instantiation of the class. A property declared as static can not be accessed with an instantiated class object (though a static method can).
Example:
<?php
class Foo {
public static function aStaticMethod() {
// ...
}
}
Foo::aStaticMethod();
$classname = 'Foo';
$classname::aStaticMethod(); // As of PHP 5.3.0
?>
See the reference of Static Keyword from php.net.
If you can, use static methods as a default. static methods run quicker than their non-static counterparts.