Some quick background info: I'm coding up a site which matches books to the classes they're required for.
I have two pieces of data that I need to represent in my code-- which books go with which classes, and the data (titles, authors, pricing, etc.) on these books.
Currently I represent this all with two arrays: $classArray, and $Books_data.
The advantage of this approach over a one-variable approach is that I don't repeat myself-- if a Book is required multiple times for different classes, only the ISBN needs to be stored in the $classArray and I can store the data in the $Books_array. This advantage is especially poignant because I have to query the pricing data from API's on the fly. If I only had a $classBooksArray, I'd have to loop the query responses into a big array, repeating myself (seemingly) unnecessarily.
The disadvantage of this approach is that these variables follow each other almost everywhere like Siamese twins. Nearly every function that needs one, needs the other. And my coding spidey sense tells me it might be unnecessary.
So, what would be the best way to store this data? Two arrays, one array, or some other approach I haven't mentioned (e.g. passing by reference).
Why not an associative which has two keys - one pointing to an array of classes, one to store Books
data?
$allData = array("classes" => &$classArray, "books" => &$Books_data);
That way you're only passing around 1 variable (less clutter) but retain all the benefits of separate data stores for books and classes.
Though, to be honest, if it's just TWO sets of data, so IMHO your spidey sense is wrong - passing both as separate parameters is perfectly fine. Once you get into a set of siamise sextuplet variables, then the above approach starts to actually bring benefits.
A multidimensional array.
$collection = array(
'classes' => array( /* Contents of $classArray */),
'books' => array( /* Contents of $Books_data */)
);
function some_function($collection) {
// looping over books
foreach ($collection['books'] as $book) {
// yadda yadda
}
}
Or better yet a class:
/* Define */
class Collection {
private $books;
private $classes;
public function __construct($classes = array(), $books = array()) {
$this->books = $books;
$this->classes = $classes;
}
public function addBook($book) {
$this->books[] = $book;
}
public function addClass($class) {
$this->classes[] = $class;
}
public function get_classes() {
return $this->classes;
}
public function get_books() {
return $this->books;
}
}
function some_function(Collection $col) {
// looping over books
foreach ($col->get_books as $book) {
// yadda yadda
}
}
/* Usage */
$collection = new Collection(); // you also could pass classes and books in the
// constructor.
$collection->addBook($book);
somefunction($collection);
If your datas were a database, your current proposal being a normal form would be canonical. The two variables would just become tables and ISBN a foreign key to books table (with a third table as a class has several books). I would probably stick with the current implementation as it will be very easy to transform to database when that will be necessary (and it usually happens faster than expected).
EDIT: a comment, say it is already in a database... what I do not understand is why you would want to store a full database in memory instead of just keeping what is necessary for the current task.
Let's be OO and put the arrays into an object. Define a class with those properties, load it up, and call its methods. Or, if you must have other functions operating with the object's data, pass the instance around. Disallow direct access to the data, but provide methods for extracting the salient info.
class book_class_association {
protected $books_to_classes = array();
protected $classes_to_books = array();
function __construct() {
$this->books_to_classes = array(
'mathbook1' => array('math'),
'mathbook2' => array('math'),
);
$this->classes_to_books = array(
'math' => array('mathbook1', 'mathbook2'),
);
}
function classes_for_book( $class_name ) {
return $this->books_to_classes[$class_name];
}
function books_for_class( $class_name ) {
return $this->classes_to_books[$class_name];
}
}
Is there a reason you are not storing this data in a database and then querying the database? It is a many to many relationship, and you would need 3 tables - class , book, and class_book_intersection.
So for example, you ui could have "select class" from a list, where the list is derived from the rows in class.
Then if the class id selected is 123. The query would then be something like:
Select book.title, book.cost
from book
inner join class_book_intersection
on
class_book_intersection.classid = 123 and
class_book_intersection.bookid = book.bookid
Related
I have 2 models, store and dvd with many to many relationship
dvd model:
public function stores() {
return $this->belongsToMany('App\store');
}
store model:
public function dvds ( ) {
return $this->belongsToMany('App\dvd');
}
Then, in controller, when I need fetch data from both models, I use code like this:
$res_store = store::orderBy("id","desc")->get();
foreach( $res_store as $row ) {
$dvds = $row->dvds()->get();
foreach ($dvds as $dvd) {
// echo columns here
}
}
This works, but my question is, I'm doing this in correct way? I'm asking because it seems 2 loops for this simple relation is somehow inefficient.
No, this is not the right way.
When looping over a $store, you can access the associated $dvd records via $store->dvds; there is no need to call $row->dvds()->get(), as that is executing a new query with the same result of $store->dvds. Full code should simply be:
$stores = Store::with("dvds")->orderBy("id", "DESC")->get();
foreach($stores AS $store){
foreach($store->dvds AS $dvd){
... // Do something with `$dvd`
}
}
The ::with("dvds") clause is known as "Eager loading", and prevents $store->dvds from needing execute another query behind the scenes.
Also, please name your models correctly. Classes in PHP are StudlyCase, so Store and DVD, not store and dvd.
This is not so much a question about execution as it is a question about improving code. I am a 2nd year student, we started to touch on OOP recently and I am finally getting the hold of it....sort of.
I realize this is a very basic question, but what better place to learn from some of the best.
My Question
I have a class which creates a new match. My problem is that I am sure the code is unnecessary long and can get much improved (just keep in mind it is beginner level).Specifically I would like to know:
Can I change the below into 1 setter and 1 getter method?
I would like to use the rand() function for match ID can I do this inside the setter function of setMatchId or should it be done outside of the class?
Thank you very much for taking the time to read this.
<?php
class match{
private $matchId;
private $team1;
private $team2;
private $venue;
function __construct($pMatchId, $pTeam1, $pTeam2, $pVenue){
$this->matchId = $pMatchId;
$this->team1 = $pTeam1;
$this->team2 = $pTeam2;
$this->venue = $pVenue;
}
function setMatchId($pMatchId){
$this->matchId = $pMatchId;
}
function getMatchId(){
return $this->matchId;
}
function setTeam1($pTeam1){
$this->team1 = $pTeam1;
}
function getTeam1(){
return $this->team1;
}
function setTeam2($pTeam2){
$this->team2 = $pTeam2;
}
function getTeam2(){
return $this->team2;
}
function setVenue($pVenue){
$this->venue = $pVenue;
}
function getVenue(){
return $this->venue;
}
} // c;lass match
$x = new match("1", "Patriots", "Chargers", "Newlands");
echo $x->getMatchId();
echo'<br />';
echo $x->getTeam1();
echo'<br />';
echo $x->getTeam2();
echo'<br />';
echo $x->getVenue();
?>
How often are teams or venues going to change for a match? I think you should get rid of the setters since you're already providing all the necessary data through your constructor.
You can indeed change your code to work with a single getter and setter methods, but I'd strongly discourage that. IDE's won't be able to assist you with code completion if you implement such methods but, most importantly, you should never blindly implement getters and setters in your entities if they have no reason to exist.
Let the design guide you on that. Start by passing everything your objects need through their constructors and only add getters/setters when you need them, not the other way around.
In terms of the randomness of the ID, you could use UUIDs for them. You could use this library to create them. I'd pass them through its constructor as well.
You can use __set and __get magic methods of PHP.
private $data = array(); // define property array
public function __set($name, $value) // set key and value in data property
{
echo "Setting '$name' to '$value'\n";
$this->data[$name] = $value;
}
public function __get($name) // get propery value
{
if(isset($this->data[$name])) {
return $this->data[$name];
}
}
You can write your existing code as below:-
class Match{
private $data = [];
function __construct($property=[]){
if(!empty($property)){
foreach($property as $key=>$value){
$this->__set($key,$value);
}
}
}
public function __set($name, $value) // set key and value in data property
{
// echo "Setting '$name' to '$value'\n";
$this->data[$name] = $value;
}
public function __get($name) // get propery value
{
if(isset($this->data[$name])) {
return $this->data[$name];
}
}
}
Set properties using construct method
$x = new match(["matchId"=>"1", "team1"=>"Patriots","team2"=>"Chargers","venue"=>"Newlands"]);
echo '<pre>'; print_r($x);
Set properties without construct method
$x = new match;
$x->matchId = '1'; // 1
$x->team1 = 'team1'; // Patriots
$x->team2 = 'Chargers'; // Chargers
$x->venue = 'Newlands'; // Newlands
echo '<pre>'; print_r($x);
output:-
Match Object
(
[data:Match:private] => Array
(
[matchId] => 1
[team1] => Patriots
[team2] => Chargers
[venue] => Newlands
)
)
Now you can access and set propery by below way:-
// Get all properties values
echo $x->matchId; // 1
echo $x->team1; // Patriots
echo $x->team2; // Chargers
echo $x->venue; // Newlands
// Overwrite existing values
$x->team1 = 'new team1';
// Get updated value
echo $x->team1; // new team1
Hope it will help you :)
The first question:
Can I change the below into 1 setter and 1 getter method?
[EDIT] Reply to first comment:
You can, but you shouldn't.. To me it's better keep all setters and getters parted. You might want to get only a specific field when using your match object instance in your code. So if you need to get team1 or team2 it's better to have two different getter methods.
The second question:
I would like to use the rand() function for match ID can I do this inside the setter function of setMatchId or should it be done outside of the class?
Well, in my opinion, the best way of handle it is to disallow any access to the $matchId field making it private and removing any setter method.
Then, you should place the rand generation inside the constructor or, if you want to keep it parted in a specific function you could make a public getter like this:
public getMatchId(){
if ($this->matchId != null)
return $this->matchId
// Generate it with rand()
$this->matchId = rand()
return $this->matchId;
}
In the constructor then simply call the getMatchId() method.
By the way, this solution doesn't help you with getting a unique match identifier, to achieve that you should generate it not purely randomly but using something that is dependant of the informations of the Match (for instance you could use a combination of team1, team2 and venue) and/or keep track of used matchid (a static field or a database could be helpful)
[EDIT] Reply to second comment:
I'm using the if statement in the getter because this getter is thought to generate the $matchId when it's called for the first time, while it'll always return the previously generated $matchId for the other calls.
You question made me think of another possible implementation. If you want to avoid the if then you should generate the $matchId in the constructor.
This way should be fine:
public __construct($team1, $team2, $venue){
$this->matchId = rand();
$this->team1 = $team1;
$this->team2 = $team2;
$this->venue = $venue
}
public getMatchId(){
return $this->matchId;
}
There are multiple answers covering how to do setters and getters in various degrees of complexity and magic. In this post I would rather focus on the design quality of your class Match. This is based on the design idea related to what do you want to use your class for?
Some typical statements answering this question:
Keep record of a given match – In other words it needs to hold information related to one match, i.e. venue, homeTeam, awayTeam, result?, and possibly a matchId related to storing the result somewhere
Set the result of a match – You'll create the match, and then a little later you'll set the actual result of the match.
Store a match – If you don't store it anywhere it is kind of futile to keep track of the match, so most likely you would need some interface either to a database, or some mean to get all information related to a match ready for storing into a file or similar
Ability to retrieve the details of a match – If not getting all information at the same time, you could opt for a getter for the specific values you'll want.
For me I don't see the need for changing the team or venue, as that would mean a new match in my world. And I would definitively not implement a generic setter which would allow for setting whatever to whatever. A generic setter is a security risk in my world.
Alternate implementation
Adhering to the statements given I would write something similar to this:
<?php
class Match {
private $matchId;
private $homeTeam;
private $awayTeam;
private $venue;
private $result;
function __construct($venue, $homeTeam, $awayTeam, $matchId = NULL) {
$this->venue = $venue;
$this->homeTeam = $homeTeam;
$this->awayTeam = $awayTeam;
if (is_null($matchId)) {
$this->matchId = uniqid();
} else {
$this->matchId = $matchId;
}
// In PHP7: $this->matchId = $matchId ?: uniqid();
$this->result = "";
}
function setResult($result){
$this->result = $result;
}
function getAll(){
return array($this->venue, $this->homeTeam, $this->awayTeam,
$this->matchId, $this->result);
}
function __get($name) {
if (property_exist($this, $name)) {
return $this->$name;
}
}
function __set($name, $value) {
if (property_exist($this, $name)) {
$this->$name = $value;
}
}
?>
Some comments related to this code:
homeTeam and awayTeam – Having variables name team1 or team2 is a code smell, to me. I would either create an array for those, or find better names. In this case I opted for better names to make a clear distinction between the two variables.
__construct() – When creating a match the default value for matchId indicates that it will be set to a uniqid(). I consider this a better practice rather then using a random value. And it still allows for setting a specific match id if you want to provide this.
Based on the assumption that you don't know the result when the match is created, the result is set to an empty string for starters.
setResult() – As this is the only part of a match I foresee changing I provided a setter for this value.
getAll() – This returns an array of all the values, ready for storing somewhere. If you like this could easily be changed into a comma separated string or whatever format you would like for post-processing. It could even be a dictionary, but I just used a simple array to keep it simple.
__get() and __set() – Contrary to some of the other answers this getter (and setter) is a little safer to use as it verifies that the actual property is defined in this class using property_exist().
I'm not sure if I would actually have the generic setter, but if you'd like one, this is a better option as it doesn't allow for creation of new properties to your class at runtime.
Usage of class
Here is some simple usage of the class (if my untested code actually works, that is):
<!php
$m = new Match("Newlands", "Patriots", "Chargers");
// Time passes
$m->setResult("102-32");
echo 'In the game ' . $m->homeTeam . ' vs ' . $m->awayTeam
echo ' at ' . $m ->venue ' the result was ' . $m->result . ' <br />'
// Append the match to a file
$fp = fopen('allmatches.csv', 'a');
fputcsv($fp, $m->getAll());
fclose($fp);
?>
This uses fputcsv to format the array into a line in the csv format. Having a method or some way to create a match from an array is left as an exercise. You possibly have a static method taking a file name as a parameter, and return an array of matches.
There is no good or bad model when you aren't trying to solve a well-defined problem just like there's no good answer to a bad question.
Before even worrying about things such as getters and setters you need to determine the purpose of the model and what problem it is trying to solve.
I understand that this is probably just a modeling exercise, but if you want it to have any value, start by defining your problem domain and then work out the solution.
For instance, if you are modeling an application service that allows to query a list of matches, then perhaps Match is a simple immutable data structure that acts as a Data Transfer Object.
If you were modeling a ViewModel that is meant to be 2-way bound to a CRUD screen allowing to update the details of a Match then perhaps you'd have a data container with public getters and setters like you had.
If you were crafting a tournament system domain model and had a use case such as: "Tournament administrators will enter the scoring of a match after it's completion. The outcome will be automatically resolved by the system. The possible results are that the home/away team wins or a draw."
Then perhaps Match would carry a behavior such as (pseudo-code):
scoring = new Scoring(homeTeamScore: 2, awayTeamScore: 3);
match.complete(scoring);
match.outcome(); //-> MatchOutcome.AwayTeamWon
As you can see, the model should be a solution to a well-defined problem. It should model the reality of that problem (not the real world), no more, no less.
I would like to use the rand() function for match ID can I do this
inside the setter function of setMatchId or should it be done outside
of the class?
The generation of an entity's identity is usually not the responsibility of the identity itself in respect to the Single Responsibility Principle. The algorithm that generates the identity may change independently of the Match concept itself.
First of all, there's nothing bad in having several get/set methods, unless you're coding on a 64kb RAM machine (Where you probably would use C, Lua, or such instead of PHP). If they're all doing (almost) the same thing and you think they're messing code up, put them on the very end of your class, so they don't block your vision ;-).
For the practical altering of your code:
If you have several members which differ only by data but actually represent the same kind, like team1, team2 puting them into an array and use a get/setByIndex is legit.
(Take care: I didn't use PHP for hundreds of years or so, there might me syntactical mistakes)
Example:
function setTeamByIndex($pIndex, $pTeam){
$this->teams[$pIndex] = $pTeam;
}
function getTeamByIndex($pIndex){
return $this->team[$pIndex];
}
Alternatively, in other language it's common to return multiple values. This is not possible in PHP, but there's a workaround:
setTeamsFromArray
-- receives an Array with teams and applies the given teams by their key.
getAllTeamsArray
-- returns an Array, containing all teams.
function setTeamsFromArray($pTeams){
foreach ($pTeams as $key=>$team) {
$this->teams[$key] = $team
}
}
function getAllTeamsArray(){
return array( $this->team1, $this->team2 )
}
echo(getAllTeamsArray()[0]) -> echos team1
echo(getAllTeamsArray()[1]) -> echos team2
In my opinion, this is all one reasonable could do in your case.
Shrinking stuff down is not always reasonable and 10 4liners are, most of the time, better than 1 40liner.
for geter and seter you can use __call() magic method for example realize the geters and setters
public function __call($name, $arguments)
{
// TODO: Implement __call() method.
$method = substr($name,0,3);
$key = strtolower(substr($name,3,strlen($name)));
if($method == 'set') {
$this->_data[$key] = $argument[0]
return $this;
} elseif($method=='get') {
if(isset($this->_data[$key])) {
return $this->_data[$key];
} else {
return null;
}
}
}
this is simple realization getter and setter automaticaly generate.
I have the following example in which I tend to use a couple of classes, to create a simple web app.
The file hierarchy seems like this.
> cupid
- libs
- request
- router
- database
- view
- bootstrap.php
- index.php
The index.php just calls the bootstrap.php which in turn contains something like this:
// bootstrap.php
namespace cupid
use request, router, database, view;
spl_autoload_register(function($class){ /* autoload */ });
$request = new view;
$response = new response;
$router = new router;
$database = new database;
$router->get('/blog/{id}', function($id) use ($database, $view) {
$article = $database->select("SELECT blog, content FROM foo WHERE id = ?",[$id]);
$view->layout('blogPage', ['article'=>$article]);
});
As you can probably tell, my problem is this line:
$article = $database->select("SELECT blog, content FROM foo WHERE id = ?", [$id]);
Which I don't want to use, and instead try a " Domain Object Model " approach.
Now, given that I will add another folder called domain, with blog.php
> cupid
- domain
- Blog.php
- libs
...
And fill blog.php with properties mapping table rows, and getter and setters ..
namespace App\Domain;
class Blog {
private $id, $title, $content, $author;
public function getTitle(){
return $this->title;
}
public function setTitle($title){
$this->title = $title;
}
...
}
My question is: Assuming my understanding of DOM is so far correct, and that I have a CRUD/ORM class, or a PDO wrapper to query the database;
"How can I tie together, i.e. the blog model with the PDO wrapper to fetch a blog inside my bootstrap file?"..
As far as a Domain Object you basically already have written one, your blog object. To qualify as a domain model all a class must to is to provide a representation along with any of the functionality of a concept within your problem space.
The more interesting problem here and the one you appear to be struggling with is how to persist a domain model. Keeping with the tenet of the single responsibility principle your Blog class should deal with being a blog post and doing the things that a blog post can do, not storing one. For that you would introduce the concept of a repository of blog posts that would deal with storing and retrieving objects of this type. Below is a simple implementation of how this can be done.
class BlogRepository {
public function __construct(\cupid\database $db){
$this->db = $db;
}
public function findById($id){
$blogData = $this->db->select("select * from blog where id = ?", [$id]);
if ($blogData){
return $this->createBlogFromArray($blogData);
}
return null;
}
public function findAllByTag($tag){...}
public function save(Blog $blog) {...}
private function createBlogFromArray(array $array){
$blog = new Blog();
$blog->setId($blogData["id"]);
$blog->setTitle($blogData["title"]);
$blog->setContent($blogData["content"]);
$blog->setAuthor($blogData["author"]);
return $blog;
}
}
Then your controller should look something like this.
$router->get('/blog/{id}', function($id) use ($blogRepository, $view) {
$article = $blogRepository->findById($id);
if ($article) {
$view->layout('blogPage', ['article'=>$article]);
} else {
$view->setError("404");
}
});
To truly be SOLID the above class should be a database specific implementation of a BlogRepository interface to adhere to IoC. A factory should also probably be supplied to BlogRepository to actually create the blog objects from data retrieved from the store.
In my opinion one of the great benefits of doing this is you have a single place where you can implement and maintain all of your blog related interactions with the database.
Other Advantages to this method
Implementing caching for your domain objects would be trivial
Switching to a different data source (from flat files, blogger api, Document Database Server,PostgresSQL etc.) could be done easily.
You can alternatively use a type aware ORM for a more general solution to this same problem. Basically this Repository class is nothing more than a ORM for a single class.
The important thing here is that you are not talking directly to the database and leaving sql scattered throughout your code. This creates a maintenance nightmare and couples your code to the schema of your database.
Personally I always tend to stick the database operations in a database class which does all the heavy lifting of initialising the class, opening the connection etc. It also has generic query-wrappers to which I pass the SQL-statements which contains the normal placeholders for the bound variables, plus an array of the variables to be bound (or the variable number of parameters approach if thats suits you better). If you want to bind each param individually and not use the $stmt->execute(array()); You just pass in the types with the value in a data structure of your choosing, multi dim array, dictionary, JSON, whatever suits your needs and you find easy to work with.
The model class it self (Blog in your case) then subclasses the Database. Then you have a few choices to make. Do you want to use the constructor to create only new objects? Do you want it to only load based on IDs? Or a mix of both? Something like:
function __construct(id = null, title = null, ingress = null, body = null) {
if(id){
$row = $this->getRow("SELECT * FROM blog WHERE id = :id",id); // Get a single row from the result
$this->title = $row->title;
$this->ingress = $row->ingress;
$this->body = $row->body;
... etc
} else if(!empty(title,ingress,body)){
$this->title = title;
... etc
}
}
Maybe neither? You can skip the constructor and use the new(title, ingress, body), save() and a load(id) methods if thats your preference.
Of course, the query part can be generalised even further if you just configure some class members and let the Database-superclass do the query building based on what you send in or set as member-variables. For example:
class Database {
$columns = []; // Array for storing the column names, could also be a dictionary that also stores the values
$idcolumn = "id"; // Generic id column name typically used, can be overridden in subclass
...
// Function for loading the object in a generic way based on configured data
function load($id){
if(!$this->db) $this->connect(); // Make sure we are connected
$query = "SELECT "; // Init the query to base string
foreach($this->columns as $column){
if($query !== "SELECT ") $query .= ", "; // See if we need comma before column name
$query .= $column; // Add column name to query
}
$query .= " FROM " . $this->tablename . " WHERE " . $this->idcolumn . " = :" . $this->idcolumn . ";";
$arg = ["col"=>$this->idcolumn,"value"=>$id,"type"=>PDO::PARAM_INT];
$row = $this->getRow($query,[$arg]); // Do the query and get the row pass in the type of the variable along with the variable, in this case an integer based ID
foreach($row as $column => $value){
$this->$column = $value; // Assign the values from $row to $this
}
}
...
function getRow($query,$args){
$statement = $this->query($query,$args); // Use the main generic query to return the result as a PDOStatement
$result = $statement->fetch(); // Get the first row
return $result;
}
...
function query($query,$args){
...
$stmt = $this->db->prepare($query);
foreach($args as $arg){
$stmt->bindParam(":".$arg["col"],$arg["value"],$arg["type"]);
}
$stmt->execute();
return $stmt;
}
...
}
Now as you see the load($id), getrow($query,$args) and query($query,$args) is completely generic. ´getrow()´is just a wrapper on query() that gets the first row, you may want to have several different wrappers that to or interpret your statement result in different ways. You may also even want to add object specific wrappers to your models if they cannot be made generic. Now the model, in your case Blog could look like:
class Blog extends Database {
$title;
$ingress;
$body;
...
function __construct($id = null){
$this->columns = ["title","ingress","body","id",...];
$this->idcolumn = "articleid"; // override parent id name
...
if($id) $this->load($id);
}
...
}
Use it as so: $blog = new Blog(123); to load a specific blog, or $blog = new Blog(); $blog->title = "title"; ... $blog->save(); if you want a new.
"How can I tie together, i.e. the blog model with the PDO wrapper to fetch a blog inside my bootstrap file?"..
To tie the two together, you could use an object-relational mapper (ORM). ORM libraries are built just for glueing your PHP classes to database rows. There are a couple of ORM libraries for PHP around. Also, most ORMs have a built in database abstraction layer, which means that you can simply switch the database vendor without any hassle.
Considerations when using an ORM:
While introducing a ORM also introduces some bloat (and some learning), it may not be worthwhile investing the time for simply a single Blog object. Although, if your blog entries also have an author, one or multiple categories and/or associated files, an ORM may soon help you reading/writing the database. Judging from your posted code, an ORM will pay off when extending the application in the future.
Update: Example using Doctrine 2
You may have a look at the querying section of the official Doctrine documentation to see the different options you have for read access. Reconsider the example you gave:
// current implementation
$article = $database->select("SELECT blog, content FROM foo WHERE id = ?",[$id]);
// possible implementation using Doctrine
$article = $em->getRepository(Blog::class)->find($id);
However, ideally you define your own repository to separate your business logic from Doctrines API like the following example illustrates:
use Doctrine\ORM\EntityRepository;
interface BlogRepositoryInterface {
public function findById($id);
public function findByAuthor($author);
}
class BlogRepsitory implements BlogRepositoryInterface {
/** #var EntityRepository */
private $repo;
public function __construct(EntityRepository $repo) {
$this->repo = $repo;
}
public function findById($id) {
return $this->repo->find($id);
}
public function findByAuthor($author) {
return $this->repo->findBy(['author' => $author]);
}
}
I hope the example illustrates how easily you can separate your business domain models and logic from the underlying library and how powerful ORMs can come into play.
I want to include the model name in the returned results of a query using CakePHP's find() methods.
For instance, if I do a
$person = $this->Person->find("first", array(
"conditions" => array (
"Person.id" => $id
)
));
I get back
Person{id:1, name:Abraham Lincoln}
I want to get back
Person{id:1, name:Abraham Lincoln, model: Person}
I'm fairly front-end oriented. I know I could loop through results and add these at the controller level, but that seems tedious, especially since most of my queries are far more complex, utilizing contain(). I imagine somewhere in CakePHP's core there's a place this kind of functionality could be added, I just don't know where.
Essentially, I'm looking for where CakePHP casts the database query to a php variable, so I can inject my additional model value.
I do know I will never use the column name "model" anywhere in my application. I'm also certain I want this information where I'm requesting it to be in every singe query, as little sense as it may make.
Add this to every model where you need it:
public function afterFind($results, $primary = false) {
foreach($results as $ikey => $item) {
foreach($item as $skey => $subitem) {
if(is_array($subitem))
$results[$ikey][$skey]['model'] = $skey;
else $results[$ikey]['model'] = $skey;
}
}
return $results;
}
Unfortunately I wasn't able to get this work when I stored it in AppModel.
Just recently I started rewriting a previously procedurally written website by myself, I chose PDO as the wrapper since I'm also getting used to the OOP way of doing things. I would like some advice about the structure of the classes.
Mostly everything is database-driven, like adding categories and subcategories, brands of products, products, users, etc. I suppose each of them could be one class and since I need CRUD operations on all of them, I need a generic way of inserting, updating, deleting records in the MySql database. The problem is not the code, I'd like to (and already have) coded some of the CRUD operations by myself according to my needs, the real problem is the structure and how would I go to correctly distribute and extend those classes.
Right now I've coded 3 different approaches:
A class called 'Operations' which will be extended by all the other classes that need CRUD functions, this class contains pretty generic properties such as $id, $atributes, $fields and $table, and of course the generic methods to insert, update, delete. That way I can create, let's say my Product object with some parameters (name, category, price) and immediately Product->insert() it into the database, without passing any parameters to the insert function. The CRUD functions in this class don't accept parameters, they depend on the created object's properties.
Same as above but the CRUD functions accept parameters, making them (I suppose) more generic, in case I just need to insert something without creating an object with useless properties previously.
The 'Operations' class extends PDO, the way of working is similar to 2, but now they can be directly accessed when I create the database connection, not depending of other objects.
I'm leaning towards the first option because I think, for the most part, that it will satisfy everything I'll do with this website, again the website is already coded but procedurally, which has been a mess to maintain, so basically I need to re-do things but OO.
CMSs or already coded wrappers aside (the purpose of doing this is to learn PDO and getting used to OOP), which would be the best way to do that? not limited to the options I mentioned.
Here's the 'Operations' class I've managed to code so far, where I've been doing tests sandbox-like, don't mind the spanish variable names. Advices on the code are welcome too.
class Operaciones {
private $database;
protected $id;
protected $atributos;
protected $tabla;
protected $campos;
public function __construct($link) {
$this->database = $link;
}
public function insertar() {
if (!$this->verificarCamposNulos($this->atributos, $this->campos))
echo 'Campos nulos<br />';
else {
$this->prepararCampos();
$placeholders = $this->generarPlaceholders();
$stmt = $this->database->prepare("INSERT INTO {$this->tabla} ({$this->campos}) VALUES ({$placeholders})");
$valores = array_values($this->atributos);
$stmt->execute($valores);
$stmt = NULL;
echo 'Se ha insertado exitosamente';
}
}
public function modificar() {
if (!$this->verificarCamposNulos() || empty($this->id))
echo 'Campos nulos<br />';
else {
$this->prepararCampos('=?');
$stmt = $this->database->prepare("UPDATE {$this->tabla} SET {$this->campos} WHERE id = {$this->id}");
$valores = array_values($this->atributos);
$stmt->execute($valores);
$stmt = NULL;
echo 'Se ha modificado exitosamente';
}
}
private function generarPlaceholders() {
for($i=0;$i<count($this->atributos);$i++)
$qmarks[$i] = '?';
return implode(',', $qmarks);
}
// Check if the values to be inserted are NULL, depending on the field format given
private function verificarCamposNulos() {
$n_campos = explode(',', $this->campos);
$valores = array_values($this->atributos);
foreach($n_campos as $i => $result) {
if (strstr($result, '#'))
if (empty($valores[$i]))
return false;
}
return true;
}
// Removes the '#' from each field, used to check which fields are NOT NULL in mysql
private function prepararCampos($sufijo = NULL) {
$n_campos = explode(',', $this->campos);
foreach($n_campos as $i => $result)
$n_campos[$i] = str_replace('#', '', $result) . $sufijo;
$this->campos = implode(',', $n_campos);
}
}