In a lot of my PHP classes, I have this code:
private $strError = "";
private $intErrorCode = NULL;
private $blnError = FALSE;
public function isError() {
return $this->blnError;
}
public function getErrorCode() {
return $this->intErrorCode;
}
private function setError( $strError, $intErrorCode = NULL ) {
$this->blnError = TRUE;
$this->intErrorCode = $intErrorCode;
$this->strError = $strError;
}
The point is so that outside code can know if an object has an error state, what the string of the error is, etc. But to have this exact code in a bunch of different classes is repetitious!
I'd love to have a dual-extension where I could do
class childClass extends parentClass, error {
...
}
And have those properties and methods inborn, But PHP doesn't support multiple inheritances. What I'm thinking about doing is creating an error class that exists inside each class. If I make it public, I can call it directly through the object
if ( $myObject->error->isError() ) {...}
but wouldn't that also make its error status settable from outside the containing class,
$myObject->error->setError("I shouldn't be doing this here");
which I would rather avoid?
Or I could write 'gateway' functions in the containing class, which do the appropriate calls on the error object, and prevent setting the error status from outside,
class childClass extends parentClass {
private $error;
public function __construct(...) {
...
$error = & new error();
...
}
public function isError() {...}
public function getError() {...}
public function getErrorCode() {...}
private function setError() {...}
...
}
but that leads to (some of) the code duplication that I'm trying to avoid.
What's the optimal solution here? I'm trying to have functionality for error statuses for a number of objects, so that the outside world can see their error state, with minimal repetition.
Use composition instead of inheritance.
class Errors {
private $strError = "";
private $intErrorCode = NULL;
private $blnError = FALSE;
public function isError() {
return $this->blnError;
}
public function getErrorCode() {
return $this->intErrorCode;
}
private function setError( $strError, $intErrorCode = NULL ) {
$this->blnError = TRUE;
$this->intErrorCode = $intErrorCode;
$this->strError = $strError;
}
}
And now use a private instance variable to refer to it:
class childClass extends parentClass {
private $errors = new Errors();
...
}
The private visibility prevents you from referencing $errors outside of the class.
There's also no need to create isError(), getError(), etc. inside childClass (and therefore no need to worry about code duplication). Simply call $this->errors->isError(), $this->errors->getError(), etc. If you still wanted to require those methods to be implemented though, as suggested below, you could specify an interface.
You could also abuse the __call magic method to do the same thing:
public function __call($name, array $arguments) {
$name = strtolower($name);
if (isset($this->methods[$name])) {
array_unshift($arguments, $this);
return call_user_func_array($this->methods[$name], $arguments);
}
throw new BadMethodCallException('Method does not exist');
}
Note that I said abuse... Ideally, I'd think of a different architecture rather than having all these "common methods" everywhere. Why not use an exception instead of checking $foo->isError? If that's not appropriate, why not decorate a class?
class Errors
protected $object = null;
public function __construct($object) {
$this->object = $object;
}
public function __call($method, array $arguments) {
$callback = array($this->object, $method);
if (is_callable($callback)) {
return call_user_func_array($callback, $arguments);
}
throw new BadMethodCallException('Method does not exist');
}
public function __get($name) { return $this->object->$name; }
public function __set($name, $value) { $this->object->$name = $value; }
// Your methods here
public function isInstance($name) { return $this->object instanceof $name; }
}
Then just "wrap" your existing object in that class:
$obj = new Errors($obj);
$obj->foo();
As of PHP 5.4, you can use Traits.
For example you could make Trait called ErrorTrait like this:
trait ErrorTrait {
private $strError = "";
private $intErrorCode = NULL;
private $blnError = FALSE;
public function isError() {
return $this->blnError;
}
public function getErrorCode() {
return $this->intErrorCode;
}
private function setError( $strError, $intErrorCode = NULL ) {
$this->blnError = TRUE;
$this->intErrorCode = $intErrorCode;
$this->strError = $strError;
}
}
Then you would define your child class like this:
class childClass extends parentClass {
use ErrorTrait;
...
}
Traits work basically like copy/paste so all of the code in the trait would be available within the class (without the code duplication).
Related
I am trying to understand how to efficiently create a new class object and set the variables directly.
I have a class:
class element_model
{
public $sType;
public $properties;
}
I have a controller in which the following function is defined:
public function create_element($sType, $properties)
{
$oElement_model = new element_model($sType, $properties);
return new element_model($sType, $properties);
}
But this does not returns a new element_model with properties set, it just returns an empty object.
It does not, however, throw an error.
What is the reason the function above does not work?
You have to pass to the constructor of the class, in PHP you should have a method in the class __construct :
class element_model
{
public $sType;
public $properties;
public function __construct($type, $property)
{
$this->sType = $type;
$this->properties = $property;
}
}
Then you can access them (note the variables are public)
$elem = new element_model($sType, $properties);
$elem->sType;
Although in some cases it is better to encapsulate vars (declare them private):
class element_model
{
private $sType;
private $properties;
public function __construct($type, $property)
{
$this->sType = $type;
$this->properties = $property;
}
public function getType()
{
return $this->sType;
}
public function getProperty()
{
return $this->properties;
}
}
Then you can access the variable through a getter
$elem = new element_model($sType, $properties);
$elem->getType(); //and
$elem->getProperty();
You must create a __construct function in your class that accepts the parameters and sets your variables. Like this:
class element_model{
.
.
.
public function __construct($type,$properties)
{
$this->sType = $type;
$this->properties = $properties;
}
}
The __construct function will be called when you create the object.
But if you want to be extra cool in programming, just define your properties as private and create getter and setter functions to access the variables of your object
private $sType;
public function getSType(){
return $this->sType;
}
public function setSType($value){
$this->sType = $value;
}
I have a class that extends from Yii2's Model and I need to declare a class public property in the constructor, but I'm hitting a problem.
When I call
class Test extends \yii\base\Model {
public function __constructor() {
$test = "test_prop";
$this->{$test} = null; // create $this->test_prop;
}
}
Yii tries to call, from what I understand, the getter method of this property, which of course doesn't exist, so I hit this exception.
Also, when I actually do $this->{$test} = null;, this method gets called.
My question is: Is there a way to declare a class public property in another way? Maybe some Reflexion trick?
You could override getter/setter, e.g. :
class Test extends \yii\base\Model
{
private $_attributes = ['test_prop' => null];
public function __get($name)
{
if (array_key_exists($name, $this->_attributes))
return $this->_attributes[$name];
return parent::__get($name);
}
public function __set($name, $value)
{
if (array_key_exists($name, $this->_attributes))
$this->_attributes[$name] = $value;
else parent::__set($name, $value);
}
}
You could also create a behavior...
Ok, I received help from one of Yii's devs. Here is the answer:
class Test extends Model {
private $dynamicFields;
public function __construct() {
$this->dynamicFields = generate_array_of_dynamic_values();
}
public function __set($name, $value) {
if (in_array($name, $this->dynamicFields)) {
$this->dynamicFields[$name] = $value;
} else {
parent::__set($name, $value);
}
}
public function __get($name) {
if (in_array($name, $this->dynamicFields)) {
return $this->dynamicFields[$name];
} else {
return parent::__get($name);
}
}
}
Note that I'm using in_array instead of array_key_exists because the dynamicFields array is a plain array, not an associative one.
EDIT: This is actually wrong. See my accepted answer.
Try to set variable in init method.
Like this:
public function init() {
$test = "test_prop";
$this->{$test} = null; // create $this->test_prop;
parent::init();
}
I want to be able to do something like:
objects = getAllInstances(ClassName);
where ClassName has a unique field, so that two instances can not have the exact same value of that field.
class ClassName {
protected $unique_field;
public function __construct($value)
{
$objects = getAllInstances(self);
foreach($objects as $object)
{
if($object->getUniqueField() === $value)
{
return $object;
}
}
}
public function getUniqueField()
{
return $this->unique_field;
}
};
Is there a design pattern, a built-in function in PHP for this purpose, or must I use a static array that holds all the created instances and then just loop over it?
You could create a factory that keeps a reference to all instances created with it:
class ClassNameFactory
{
private $instances = [];
public function create($value)
{
return $this->instances[] = new ClassName($value);
}
public function getInstances()
{
return $this->instances;
}
}
$f = new ClassNameFactory();
$o1 = $f->create('foo');
$o2 = $f->create('bar');
print_r($f->getInstances());
You can hold a static array with all the existing instances. Something similar to this...
static $instances;
public function __construct($name) {
$this->unique_field = $name;
if (empty($instances)) {
self::$instances = array();
}
foreach (self::$instances as $instance) {
if ($instance->getUniqueField() === $name)
return $instance;
}
self::$instances[] = $this;
}
What you need is the registry pattern:
class ClassNameRegistry {
private $instances = array();
public function set($name, InterfaceName $instance) {
$this->instances[$name] = $instance;
}
public function get($name) {
if (!$this->has($name)) {
throw new \LogicException(sprintf(
'No instance "%s" found for class "ClassName".',
$name
);
}
return $this->instances[$name];
}
public function has($name) {
return isset($this->instances[$name]);
}
public function getAll() {
return $this->instances;
}
}
This is certainly the best OOP architecture option because you isolate the behaviour in a standalone class as a service. If you do not have a dependency injection mechanism with services, I would suggest you to define the registry class as a singleton!
In my example, I used a InterfaceName to have a low coupling between Registry and its handled instances.
We have a class that holds a public array called $saved that contains lots of data required to share between methods (example below)...
class Common {
public $saved = array();
public function setUser($data) {
$this->saved['user_data'] = $data;
}
public function getUserID() {
return $this->saved['user_data']['id'];
}
}
There are literally thousands of lines of code that work like this.
The problem is that new instance of classes that extend Common are being made within some methods so when they access $saved it does not hold the same data.
The solution is to make $saved a static variable, however I can't change all of the references to $this->saved so I want to try and keep the code identical but make it act static.
Here is my attempt to make $this->saved calls static...
class PropertyTest {
private $data = array();
public function __set($name, $value) {
$this->data[$name] = $value;
}
public function __get($name) {
if (array_key_exists($name, $this->data)) {
return $this->data[$name];
}
return null;
}
public function __isset($name) {
return isset($this->data[$name]);
}
public function __unset($name) {
unset($this->data[$name]);
}
}
class Common {
public $saved;
private static $_instance;
public function __construct() {
$this->saved = self::getInstance();
}
public static function getInstance() {
if (self::$_instance === null) {
self::$_instance = new PropertyTest();
self::$_instance->foo = array();
}
return self::$_instance->foo;
}
}
This doesn't quite work when setting a variable it doesn't seem to stay static (test case below)...
class Template extends Common {
public function __construct() {
parent::__construct();
$this->saved['user_data'] = array('name' => 'bob');
$user = new User();
}
}
class User extends Common {
public function __construct() {
parent::__construct();
$this->saved['user_data']['name'] .= " rocks!";
$this->saved['user_data']['id'] = array(400, 10, 20);
}
}
$tpl = new Template();
print_r($tpl->saved['user_data']);
$this->saved is empty when User gets initialized and doesn't seem to be the same variable, the final print_r only shows an array of name => bob.
Any ideas?
First of all, I have to say that, IMO, it is not that good to use an instance's property as a class's property ($saved is not declared as static but its value is shared with all instance).
Here is a working version http://codepad.org/8hj1MOCT, and here is the commented code. Basically, the trick is located in using both ArrayAccess interface and the singleton pattern.
class Accumulator implements ArrayAccess {
private $container = array();
private static $instance = null;
private function __construct() {
}
public function getInstance() {
if( self::$instance === null ) {
self::$instance = new self();
}
return self::$instance;
}
public function offsetSet($offset, $value) {
if (is_null($offset)) {
$this->container[] = $value;
} else {
$this->container[$offset] = $value;
}
}
public function offsetExists($offset) {
return isset($this->container[$offset]);
}
public function offsetUnset($offset) {
unset($this->container[$offset]);
}
public function offsetGet($offset) {
return isset($this->container[$offset]) ? $this->container[$offset] : null;
}
}
class Common {
public $saved = null;
public function __construct() {
// initialize the "saved" object's property with the singleton
// that variable can be used with the array syntax thanks to the ArrayAccess interface
// so you won't have to modify your actual code
// but also, since it's an object, this local "$this->saved" is a reference to the singleton object
// so any change made to "$this->saved" is in reality made into the Accumulator::$instance variable
$this->saved = Accumulator::getInstance();
}
public function setUser($data) {
$this->saved['user_data'] = $data;
}
public function getUser() {
return $this->saved['user_data'];
}
}
class Template extends Common {
// you can redeclare the variable or not. Since the property is inherited, IMO you should not redeclare it, but it works in both cases
// public $saved = null;
public function __construct() {
// maybe we can move this initialization in a method in the parent class and call that method here
$this->saved = Accumulator::getInstance();
}
}
I think there are a number of issues with this implementation that could well come back to bite you. However, in your current implementation your contructing a new instance (albeit through a static call) every time.
Instead use getInstance() as your singleton hook, and make your __construct private, as you'll only be accessing it from with the context of the Common class.
Like so:
class Common {
public $saved;
private static $_instance;
private function __construct() {
}
public static function getInstance() {
if (self::$_instance === null) {
self::$_instance = new self();
... any other modifications you want to make ....
}
return self::$_instance;
}
}
And don't ever run parent::_construct(), instead always use the getInstance() method.
You might also want to ditch the idea of extending this singleton class. This is really a bad antipattern and could cost you a number of issues in the long run. Instead just maintain a Common class that other classes can read / write to. As its a singleton you don't need to worry about injection.
I seem to have solved the problem, by making $this->saved a reference to a static variable it works...
class Common {
private static $savedData = array();
public $saved;
public function __construct() {
$this->saved =& self::$savedData;
}
}
I need to implement the following pattern in php:
class EventSubscriber
{
private $userCode;
public function __construct(&$userCode) { $this->userCode = &$userCode; }
public function Subscribe($eventHandler) { $userCode[] = $eventHandler; }
}
class Event
{
private $subscriber;
private $userCode = array();
public function __construct()
{
$this->subscriber = new Subscriber($this->userCode)
}
public function Subscriber() { return $this->subscriber; }
public function Fire()
{
foreach ($this->userCode as $eventHandler)
{
/* Here i need to execute $eventHandler */
}
}
}
class Button
{
private $eventClick;
public function __construct() { $this->eventClick = new Event(); }
public function EventClick() { return $this->eventClick->Subscriber(); }
public function Render()
{
if (/* Button was clicked */) $this->eventClick->Fire();
return '<input type="button" />';
}
}
class Page
{
private $button;
// THIS IS PRIVATE CLASS MEMBER !!!
private function ButtonClickedHandler($sender, $eventArgs)
{
echo "button was clicked";
}
public function __construct()
{
$this->button = new Button();
$this->button->EventClick()->Subscribe(array($this, 'ButtonClickedHandler'));
}
...
}
what is the correct way to do so.
P.S.
I was using call_user_func for that purpose and believe it or not it was able to call private class members, but after few weeks of development i've found that it stopped working. Was it a bug in my code or was it some something else that made me think that 'call_user_func' is able call private class functions, I don't know, but now I'm looking for a simple, fast and elegant method of safely calling one's private class member from other class. I'm looking to closures right now, but have problems with '$this' inside closure...
Callbacks in PHP aren't like callbacks in most other languages. Typical languages represent callbacks as pointers, whereas PHP represents them as strings. There's no "magic" between the string or array() syntax and the call. call_user_func(array($obj, 'str')) is syntactically the same as $obj->str(). If str is private, the call will fail.
You should simply make your event handler public. This has valid semantic meaning, i.e., "intended to be called from outside my class."
This implementation choice has other interesting side effects, for example:
class Food {
static function getCallback() {
return 'self::func';
}
static function func() {}
static function go() {
call_user_func(self::getCallback()); // Calls the intended function
}
}
class Barf {
static function go() {
call_user_func(Food::getCallback()); // 'self' is interpreted as 'Barf', so:
} // Error -- no function 'func' in 'Barf'
}
Anyway, if someone's interested, I've found the only possible solution via ReflectionMethod. Using this method with Php 5.3.2 gives performance penalty and is 2.3 times slower than calling class member directly, and only 1.3 times slower than call_user_func method. So in my case it is absolutely acceptable. Here's the code if someone interested:
class EventArgs {
}
class EventEraser {
private $eventIndex;
private $eventErased;
private $eventHandlers;
public function __construct($eventIndex, array &$eventHandlers) {
$this->eventIndex = $eventIndex;
$this->eventHandlers = &$eventHandlers;
}
public function RemoveEventHandler() {
if (!$this->eventErased) {
unset($this->eventHandlers[$this->eventIndex]);
$this->eventErased = true;
}
}
}
class EventSubscriber {
private $eventIndex;
private $eventHandlers;
public function __construct(array &$eventHandlers) {
$this->eventIndex = 0;
$this->eventHandlers = &$eventHandlers;
}
public function AddEventHandler(EventHandler $eventHandler) {
$this->eventHandlers[$this->eventIndex++] = $eventHandler;
}
public function AddRemovableEventHandler(EventHandler $eventHandler) {
$this->eventHandlers[$this->eventIndex] = $eventHandler;
$result = new EventEraser($this->eventIndex++, $this->eventHandlers);
return $result;
}
}
class EventHandler {
private $owner;
private $method;
public function __construct($owner, $methodName) {
$this->owner = $owner;
$this->method = new \ReflectionMethod($owner, $methodName);
$this->method->setAccessible(true);
}
public function Invoke($sender, $eventArgs) {
$this->method->invoke($this->owner, $sender, $eventArgs);
}
}
class Event {
private $unlocked = true;
private $eventReceiver;
private $eventHandlers;
private $recursionAllowed = true;
public function __construct() {
$this->eventHandlers = array();
}
public function GetUnlocked() {
return $this->unlocked;
}
public function SetUnlocked($value) {
$this->unlocked = $value;
}
public function FireEventHandlers($sender, $eventArgs) {
if ($this->unlocked) {
//защита от рекурсии
if ($this->recursionAllowed) {
$this->recursionAllowed = false;
foreach ($this->eventHandlers as $eventHandler) {
$eventHandler->Invoke($sender, $eventArgs);
}
$this->recursionAllowed = true;
}
}
}
public function Subscriber() {
if ($this->eventReceiver == null) {
$this->eventReceiver = new EventSubscriber($this->eventHandlers);
}
return $this->eventReceiver;
}
}
As time passes, there are new ways of achieving this.
Currently PSR-14 is drafted to handle this use case.
So you might find any of these interesting:
https://packagist.org/?query=psr-14