I'm trying to understand how PHP manages memory and variables with static methods in extended classes. I've got three classes one entitled Model, User1, User2. Hence:
class Model {
static public $structure;
static public $name;
static function get_structure() {
return self::$structure = file_get_contents(self::$name.'.json');
}
}
class User1 extends Model {
}
class User2 extends Model {
}
User1::$name = 'User1';
User2::$name = 'User2';
echo User1::get_structure();
echo User2::get_structure();
If I run User1::get_structure(); for some reason it doesn't populate the result accordingly, it seems to be grabbing the value of User2 (the last $name value declared).
I'm operating on the assumption that declaring User2 and extending Model creates a completely separate scope for my $name property. So User1 and User2 are declared as separate classes with the same structure as Model. Then I can statically define values for them in separate scopes.
I'm now however questioning that. If I extend and call the same $name variable do they both point back to the Model class? Or does it only create a separate scope when I declare each class with new User1(); and new User2();?
Thanks.
You get this behavior, because you are accessing same variable
class X
{
public static $data = null;
}
class Foo extends X{};
class Bar extends X{};
Foo::$data = 'lorem ipsum';
echo Bar::$data;
// :: output :: lorem ipsum;
Your $name variable stays tied to the Model class, even in inherited classes.
Yes, all classes that extends Model will point back to the same $name variable.
Sees static variable as a "global" variable.
Maybe this example will clarify you:
class Model
{
static public $name;
}
class User1 extends Model
{
public function setName( $name )
{
parent::$name = $name;
}
public function getName()
{
return parent::$name;
}
}
class User2 extends Model
{
public function setName( $name )
{
parent::$name = $name;
}
public function getName()
{
return parent::$name;
}
}
$user1 = new User1();
$user1->setName("User1");
$user2 = new User2();
$user1->setName("User2");
echo $user1->getName();
echo $user2->getName();
// Output : User2User2
You can work around it with:
<?php
class Model {
static public $structure;
static public $name;
static function get_structure() {
$class = get_called_class();
return $class::$structure = file_get_contents($class::$name.'.json');
}
}
class User1 extends Model {
static public $structure;
static public $name;
}
class User2 extends Model {
static public $structure;
static public $name;
}
User1::$name = 'User1';
User2::$name = 'User2';
echo User1::get_structure();
echo User2::get_structure();
... but, you might ask yourself the question whether this design is the proper one. atm it for instance looks like they should be instances with separate values & instance methods, but that might be because of the condensed example.
Related
Inheritance of properties is possible when a property is hardcoded. See below:
class ParentObj {
protected $familyName = 'Lincoln';
}
class ChildObj extends ParentObj {
public function __construct() {
var_dump($this->familyName);
}
}
$childObj = new ChildObj();
// OUTPUT
string 'Lincoln'
Inheritance of properties is not possible when a property is dynamic. See below:
class ParentObj {
protected $familyName;
public function setFamilyName($familyName){
$this->familyName = $familyName;
}
}
class ChildObj extends ParentObj {
public function __construct() {
var_dump($this->familyName);
}
}
$familyName = 'Lincoln';
$parentObj = new ParentObj();
$parentObj->setFamilyName($familyName);
$childObj = new ChildObj();
// OUTPUT
null
So the question is: Why is not possible for a child class to inherit properties class that are set dynamically?
The child inherits it's initial state from the parent class. It does not inherit from the concrete parent object instance.
In your first example, "Lincoln" is applicable to all ParentObject instances created. In your second example, it is applicable to the concrete $parentObj only. You are setting it specifically to that instance.
See my answer What is a class in PHP? for a more thorough explanation.
If you wanted to access the value of $familyName from all instances(objects), you can define $familyName as static, i.e. create a global class variable.
e.g.
<?php
class ParentObj {
protected static $familyName;
public function setFamilyName($familyName){
self::$familyName = $familyName;
}
}
class ChildObj extends ParentObj {
public function __construct() {
var_dump(self::$familyName);
}
}
$familyName = 'Lincoln';
$parentObj = new ParentObj();
$parentObj->setFamilyName($familyName);
$childObj = new ChildObj(); // Output: Lincoln
$familyName = 'Lee';
$parentObj->setFamilyName($familyName);
$childObj = new ChildObj(); // Output: Lee
Note of Caution: $familyName is now a global and will change for all instances of this object. This could lead to unexpected results if you ever change the value within the script. Global variables are generally considered a Bad Idea.
I have an Application class and I also have a number of separate classes that extend it. If I set a $variable in the parent Application class, How do I make it automatically available in its children?
class Application {
public $variable;
public function __construct() {
$this->variable = "Something";
}
}
class Child extends Application {
public function doSomthing() {
$mything = $variable." is cool";
return $mything;
}
}
I know I can put global $variable; in my doSomthing() method, but that is super tedious to do over and over in every method I write. Is there a way to do it where it just is available to all my child class methods?
Thanks.
You just set a property named variable in your Application class in __construct method.
If the property visibility permits (e.g. is public or protected), you can access a property potato in any children classes method with $this->potato:
class Application {
public $variable;
public function __construct() {
$this->variable = "Something";
}
}
class Child extends Application {
public function doSomthing() {
$mything = $this->variable." is cool";
return $mything;
}
}
Is there any way to define abstract class properties in PHP?
abstract class Foo_Abstract {
abstract public $tablename;
}
class Foo extends Foo_Abstract {
//Foo must 'implement' $property
public $tablename = 'users';
}
There is no such thing as defining a property.
You can only declare properties because they are containers of data reserved in memory on initialization.
A function on the other hand can be declared (types, name, parameters) without being defined (function body missing) and thus, can be made abstract.
"Abstract" only indicates that something was declared but not defined and therefore before using it, you need to define it or it becomes useless.
No, there is no way to enforce that with the compiler, you'd have to use run-time checks (say, in the constructor) for the $tablename variable, e.g.:
class Foo_Abstract {
public final function __construct(/*whatever*/) {
if(!isset($this->tablename))
throw new LogicException(get_class($this) . ' must have a $tablename');
}
}
To enforce this for all derived classes of Foo_Abstract you would have to make Foo_Abstract's constructor final, preventing overriding.
You could declare an abstract getter instead:
abstract class Foo_Abstract {
abstract public function get_tablename();
}
class Foo extends Foo_Abstract {
protected $tablename = 'tablename';
public function get_tablename() {
return $this->tablename;
}
}
Depending on the context of the property, if I want to force declaration of an abstract class property in an extended class, I like to use a constant with the static keyword for the property in the abstract object constructor or setter/getter methods. You can optionally use final to prevent the method from being overridden in extended classes.
Example: https://3v4l.org/WH5Xl
abstract class AbstractFoo
{
public $bar;
final public function __construct()
{
$this->bar = static::BAR;
}
}
class Foo extends AbstractFoo
{
//const BAR = 'foobar'; //uncomment to prevent exception
}
$foo = new Foo();
//Fatal Error: Undefined class constant 'BAR'
However, the extended class overrides the parent class properties and methods if redefined.
For example; if a property is declared as protected in the parent and redefined as public in the extended class, the resulting property is public. Otherwise, if the property is declared private in the parent it will remain private and not available to the extended class.
http://www.php.net//manual/en/language.oop5.static.php
As stated above, there is no such exact definition.
I, however, use this simple workaround to force the child class to define the "abstract" property:
abstract class Father
{
public $name;
abstract protected function setName(); // now every child class must declare this
// function and thus declare the property
public function __construct()
{
$this->setName();
}
}
class Son extends Father
{
protected function setName()
{
$this->name = "son";
}
function __construct(){
parent::__construct();
}
}
The need for abstract properties can indicate design problems. While many of answers implement kind of Template method pattern and it works, it always looks kind of strange.
Let's take a look at the original example:
abstract class Foo_Abstract {
abstract public $tablename;
}
class Foo extends Foo_Abstract {
//Foo must 'implement' $property
public $tablename = 'users';
}
To mark something abstract is to indicate it a must-have thing. Well, a must-have value (in this case) is a required dependency, so it should be passed to the constructor during instantiation:
class Table
{
private $name;
public function __construct(string $name)
{
$this->name = $name;
}
public function name(): string
{
return $this->name;
}
}
Then if you actually want a more concrete named class you can inherit like so:
final class UsersTable extends Table
{
public function __construct()
{
parent::__construct('users');
}
}
This can be useful if you use DI container and have to pass different tables for different objects.
I've asked myself the same question today, and I'd like to add my two cents.
The reason we would like abstract properties is to make sure that subclasses define them and throw exceptions when they don't. In my specific case, I needed something that could work with statically.
Ideally I would like something like this:
abstract class A {
abstract protected static $prop;
}
class B extends A {
protected static $prop = 'B prop'; // $prop defined, B loads successfully
}
class C extends A {
// throws an exception when loading C for the first time because $prop
// is not defined.
}
I ended up with this implementation
abstract class A
{
// no $prop definition in A!
public static final function getProp()
{
return static::$prop;
}
}
class B extends A
{
protected static $prop = 'B prop';
}
class C extends A
{
}
As you can see, in A I don't define $prop, but I use it in a static getter. Therefore, the following code works
B::getProp();
// => 'B prop'
$b = new B();
$b->getProp();
// => 'B prop'
In C, on the other hand, I don't define $prop, so I get exceptions:
C::getProp();
// => Exception!
$c = new C();
$c->getProp();
// => Exception!
I must call the getProp() method to get the exception and I can't get it on class loading, but it is quite close to the desired behavior, at least in my case.
I define getProp() as final to avoid that some smart guy (aka myself in 6 months) is tempted to do
class D extends A {
public static function getProp() {
// really smart
}
}
D::getProp();
// => no exception...
As you could have found out by just testing your code:
Fatal error: Properties cannot be declared abstract in ... on line 3
No, there is not. Properties cannot be declared abstract in PHP.
However you can implement a getter/setter function abstract, this might be what you're looking for.
Properties aren't implemented (especially public properties), they just exist (or not):
$foo = new Foo;
$foo->publicProperty = 'Bar';
PHP 7 makes it quite a bit easier for making abstract "properties". Just as above, you will make them by creating abstract functions, but with PHP 7 you can define the return type for that function, which makes things a lot easier when you're building a base class that anyone can extend.
<?php
abstract class FooBase {
abstract public function FooProp(): string;
abstract public function BarProp(): BarClass;
public function foo() {
return $this->FooProp();
}
public function bar() {
return $this->BarProp()->name();
}
}
class BarClass {
public function name() {
return 'Bar!';
}
}
class FooClass extends FooBase {
public function FooProp(): string {
return 'Foo!';
}
public function BarProp(): BarClass {
// This would not work:
// return 'not working';
// But this will!
return new BarClass();
}
}
$test = new FooClass();
echo $test->foo() . PHP_EOL;
echo $test->bar() . PHP_EOL;
if tablename value will never change during the object's lifetime, following will be a simple yet safe implementation.
abstract class Foo_Abstract {
abstract protected function getTablename();
public function showTableName()
{
echo 'my table name is '.$this->getTablename();
}
}
class Foo extends Foo_Abstract {
//Foo must 'implement' getTablename()
protected function getTablename()
{
return 'users';
}
}
the key here is that the string value 'users' is specified and returned directly in getTablename() in child class implementation. The function mimics a "readonly" property.
This is fairly similar to a solution posted earlier on which uses an additional variable. I also like Marco's solution though it can be a bit more complicated.
Just define the property in the base class without assigning it a (default) value.
Getting the property value without redefining it with a default value or assigning it a value will throw an Error.
<?php
class Base {
protected string $name;
public function i_am() : string {
return $this->name;
}
}
class Wrong extends Base {
...
}
class Good extends Base {
protected string $name = 'Somebody';
}
$test = new Good();
echo $test->i_am(), '<br>'; // Will show "Nobody"
$test = new Wrong();
echo $test->i_am(), '<br>'; // Will throw an Error:
// Error: Typed property Base::$name must not be accessed before initialization in ....
?>
You can define a static property in an abstract class.
<?php
abstract class Foo {
private static $bar = "1234";
public static function func() {
echo self::$bar;
}
}
Foo::func(); // It will be printed 1234
Too late to answer the question, but you may use the difference between self and static as follows
<?php
class A { // Base Class
protected static $name = 'ClassA';
public static function getSelfName() {
return self::$name;
}
public static function getStaticName() {
return static::$name;
}
}
class B extends A {
protected static $name = 'ClassB';
}
echo A::getSelfName(); // ClassA
echo A::getStaticName(); // ClassA
echo B::getSelfName(); // ClassA
echo B::getStaticName(); // ClassB
I have two classes (Model and User) but I have a problem so I have tried to explain it in a simple example :
class person
{
protected static $todo ="nothing";
public function __construct(){}
public function get_what_todo()
{
echo self::$todo;
}
}
class student extends person
{
protected static $todo ="studing";
}
$s = new student();
$s->get_what_todo(); // this will show the word (nothing)
//but I want to show the word (studing)
Please give me a solution but without writing any function in the student class I only want to make declarations there :) and thank you :)
The principle is called "late static binding", and was introduced in PHP 5.3.0; with the self keyword to access the property defined in the calling class within the inheritance tree, or static to access the property defined in the child class within that inheritance tree.
class person
{
protected static $todo ="nothing";
public function __construct(){}
public function get_what_todo()
{
echo static::$todo; // change self:: to static::
}
}
class student extends person
{
protected static $todo ="studying";
}
class teacher extends person
{
protected static $todo ="marking";
}
class guest extends person
{
}
$s = new student();
$s->get_what_todo(); // this will show the "studying" from the instantiated child class
$t = new teacher();
$t->get_what_todo(); // this will show the "marking" from the instantiated child class
$g = new guest();
$g->get_what_todo(); // this will show the "nothing" from the parent class,
// because $todo is not overriden in the child class
The reliable way to override a static variable is to do it by redeclaring it. Some people may suggest modifying it in the construct method, but I don't think that's reliable.
It won't reflect the changes until the class is constructed at least once. And of course, in class methods, don't forget to call the static variable using "static::" instead of "self::" when you want to always access the overridden variable.
Here's an example of what I mean:
The class Foo is the base class, the class Bar is changing the variable inside its constructor, and the class Baz is overriding the variable in its declaration.
class Foo
{
public static $a = "base";
}
class Bar extends Foo
{
function __construct()
{
self::$a = "overridden";
}
}
class Baz extends Foo
{
public static $a = "overridden";
}
echo 'Foo: ' . Foo::$a . '<br>';
echo 'Bar: ' . Bar::$a . '<br>';
echo 'Baz: ' . Baz::$a . '<br>';
new Bar();
echo 'Bar after instantiation: ' . Bar::$a;
This is the output from phptester.net
Foo: base
Bar: base
Baz: overridden
Bar after instantiation: overridden
As you can see, Bar's way of changing the variable isn't taking effect until after the constructor is called at least once.
EDIT: However, there is another way to edit a variable permanently and reliably: do it after the class declaration. This is especially handy if you only need to modify a variable and not completely override it, like for example an array. It feels a bit dirty, but in theory should work everytime.
class Foo
{
public static $a = [
'a' => 'a'
];
}
class Bar extends Foo
{
public static $a;
}
Bar::$a = Foo::$a;
Bar::$a['b'] = 'b';
echo 'Foo: ' . print_r(Foo::$a, true) . '<br>';
echo 'Bar: ' . print_r(Bar::$a, true) . '<br>';
This is the output from phptester.net
Foo: Array ( [a] => a )
Bar: Array ( [a] => a [b] => b )
EDIT 2: This last method also gets picked up by ReflectionClass::getStaticPropertyValue in my tests.
you can try set variable in construction
class person
{
protected static $todo = null;
public function __construct(){
self::$todo = "nothing";
}
public function get_what_todo()
{
echo self::$todo;
}
}
class student extends person
{
public function __construct() {
self::$todo = "student";
}
}
$s = new student();
$s->get_what_todo();
you can try set parent variable in construction
class person
{
protected static $todo = null;
public function __construct(){
self::$todo = "nothing";
}
public function get_what_todo()
{
echo self::$todo;
}
}
class student extends person
{
public function __construct() {
parent::$todo = "student";
}
}
$s = new student();
$s->get_what_todo();
Is there any way to define abstract class properties in PHP?
abstract class Foo_Abstract {
abstract public $tablename;
}
class Foo extends Foo_Abstract {
//Foo must 'implement' $property
public $tablename = 'users';
}
There is no such thing as defining a property.
You can only declare properties because they are containers of data reserved in memory on initialization.
A function on the other hand can be declared (types, name, parameters) without being defined (function body missing) and thus, can be made abstract.
"Abstract" only indicates that something was declared but not defined and therefore before using it, you need to define it or it becomes useless.
No, there is no way to enforce that with the compiler, you'd have to use run-time checks (say, in the constructor) for the $tablename variable, e.g.:
class Foo_Abstract {
public final function __construct(/*whatever*/) {
if(!isset($this->tablename))
throw new LogicException(get_class($this) . ' must have a $tablename');
}
}
To enforce this for all derived classes of Foo_Abstract you would have to make Foo_Abstract's constructor final, preventing overriding.
You could declare an abstract getter instead:
abstract class Foo_Abstract {
abstract public function get_tablename();
}
class Foo extends Foo_Abstract {
protected $tablename = 'tablename';
public function get_tablename() {
return $this->tablename;
}
}
Depending on the context of the property, if I want to force declaration of an abstract class property in an extended class, I like to use a constant with the static keyword for the property in the abstract object constructor or setter/getter methods. You can optionally use final to prevent the method from being overridden in extended classes.
Example: https://3v4l.org/WH5Xl
abstract class AbstractFoo
{
public $bar;
final public function __construct()
{
$this->bar = static::BAR;
}
}
class Foo extends AbstractFoo
{
//const BAR = 'foobar'; //uncomment to prevent exception
}
$foo = new Foo();
//Fatal Error: Undefined class constant 'BAR'
However, the extended class overrides the parent class properties and methods if redefined.
For example; if a property is declared as protected in the parent and redefined as public in the extended class, the resulting property is public. Otherwise, if the property is declared private in the parent it will remain private and not available to the extended class.
http://www.php.net//manual/en/language.oop5.static.php
As stated above, there is no such exact definition.
I, however, use this simple workaround to force the child class to define the "abstract" property:
abstract class Father
{
public $name;
abstract protected function setName(); // now every child class must declare this
// function and thus declare the property
public function __construct()
{
$this->setName();
}
}
class Son extends Father
{
protected function setName()
{
$this->name = "son";
}
function __construct(){
parent::__construct();
}
}
The need for abstract properties can indicate design problems. While many of answers implement kind of Template method pattern and it works, it always looks kind of strange.
Let's take a look at the original example:
abstract class Foo_Abstract {
abstract public $tablename;
}
class Foo extends Foo_Abstract {
//Foo must 'implement' $property
public $tablename = 'users';
}
To mark something abstract is to indicate it a must-have thing. Well, a must-have value (in this case) is a required dependency, so it should be passed to the constructor during instantiation:
class Table
{
private $name;
public function __construct(string $name)
{
$this->name = $name;
}
public function name(): string
{
return $this->name;
}
}
Then if you actually want a more concrete named class you can inherit like so:
final class UsersTable extends Table
{
public function __construct()
{
parent::__construct('users');
}
}
This can be useful if you use DI container and have to pass different tables for different objects.
I've asked myself the same question today, and I'd like to add my two cents.
The reason we would like abstract properties is to make sure that subclasses define them and throw exceptions when they don't. In my specific case, I needed something that could work with statically.
Ideally I would like something like this:
abstract class A {
abstract protected static $prop;
}
class B extends A {
protected static $prop = 'B prop'; // $prop defined, B loads successfully
}
class C extends A {
// throws an exception when loading C for the first time because $prop
// is not defined.
}
I ended up with this implementation
abstract class A
{
// no $prop definition in A!
public static final function getProp()
{
return static::$prop;
}
}
class B extends A
{
protected static $prop = 'B prop';
}
class C extends A
{
}
As you can see, in A I don't define $prop, but I use it in a static getter. Therefore, the following code works
B::getProp();
// => 'B prop'
$b = new B();
$b->getProp();
// => 'B prop'
In C, on the other hand, I don't define $prop, so I get exceptions:
C::getProp();
// => Exception!
$c = new C();
$c->getProp();
// => Exception!
I must call the getProp() method to get the exception and I can't get it on class loading, but it is quite close to the desired behavior, at least in my case.
I define getProp() as final to avoid that some smart guy (aka myself in 6 months) is tempted to do
class D extends A {
public static function getProp() {
// really smart
}
}
D::getProp();
// => no exception...
As you could have found out by just testing your code:
Fatal error: Properties cannot be declared abstract in ... on line 3
No, there is not. Properties cannot be declared abstract in PHP.
However you can implement a getter/setter function abstract, this might be what you're looking for.
Properties aren't implemented (especially public properties), they just exist (or not):
$foo = new Foo;
$foo->publicProperty = 'Bar';
PHP 7 makes it quite a bit easier for making abstract "properties". Just as above, you will make them by creating abstract functions, but with PHP 7 you can define the return type for that function, which makes things a lot easier when you're building a base class that anyone can extend.
<?php
abstract class FooBase {
abstract public function FooProp(): string;
abstract public function BarProp(): BarClass;
public function foo() {
return $this->FooProp();
}
public function bar() {
return $this->BarProp()->name();
}
}
class BarClass {
public function name() {
return 'Bar!';
}
}
class FooClass extends FooBase {
public function FooProp(): string {
return 'Foo!';
}
public function BarProp(): BarClass {
// This would not work:
// return 'not working';
// But this will!
return new BarClass();
}
}
$test = new FooClass();
echo $test->foo() . PHP_EOL;
echo $test->bar() . PHP_EOL;
if tablename value will never change during the object's lifetime, following will be a simple yet safe implementation.
abstract class Foo_Abstract {
abstract protected function getTablename();
public function showTableName()
{
echo 'my table name is '.$this->getTablename();
}
}
class Foo extends Foo_Abstract {
//Foo must 'implement' getTablename()
protected function getTablename()
{
return 'users';
}
}
the key here is that the string value 'users' is specified and returned directly in getTablename() in child class implementation. The function mimics a "readonly" property.
This is fairly similar to a solution posted earlier on which uses an additional variable. I also like Marco's solution though it can be a bit more complicated.
Just define the property in the base class without assigning it a (default) value.
Getting the property value without redefining it with a default value or assigning it a value will throw an Error.
<?php
class Base {
protected string $name;
public function i_am() : string {
return $this->name;
}
}
class Wrong extends Base {
...
}
class Good extends Base {
protected string $name = 'Somebody';
}
$test = new Good();
echo $test->i_am(), '<br>'; // Will show "Nobody"
$test = new Wrong();
echo $test->i_am(), '<br>'; // Will throw an Error:
// Error: Typed property Base::$name must not be accessed before initialization in ....
?>
You can define a static property in an abstract class.
<?php
abstract class Foo {
private static $bar = "1234";
public static function func() {
echo self::$bar;
}
}
Foo::func(); // It will be printed 1234
Too late to answer the question, but you may use the difference between self and static as follows
<?php
class A { // Base Class
protected static $name = 'ClassA';
public static function getSelfName() {
return self::$name;
}
public static function getStaticName() {
return static::$name;
}
}
class B extends A {
protected static $name = 'ClassB';
}
echo A::getSelfName(); // ClassA
echo A::getStaticName(); // ClassA
echo B::getSelfName(); // ClassA
echo B::getStaticName(); // ClassB