rfc:static-classes

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
rfc:static-classes [2008/05/05 20:55] – Better use case examples lstrojnyrfc:static-classes [2017/09/22 13:28] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 41: Line 41:
 </code> </code>
  
-===== Object model rules =====+ 
 + 
 + 
 +===== Class model rules =====
 The following rules would apply for static classes: The following rules would apply for static classes:
  
Line 47: Line 50:
   * Static methods in abstract static classes **may not** be called. They must be extended first   * Static methods in abstract static classes **may not** be called. They must be extended first
   * In static classes, abstract static methods **are allowed** again   * In static classes, abstract static methods **are allowed** again
-  * Static classes **may not** have a constructor, destructor, dynamic interceptors or ''__toString()''+  * Static classes **may not** have a constructor, destructor, dynamic interceptors or ''%%__toString()%%''
   * Static classes **may not** extend non-static classes   * Static classes **may not** extend non-static classes
   * The current behaviour of abstract classes/non-static classes with static members **would not** change. This is important for backwards compatibility   * The current behaviour of abstract classes/non-static classes with static members **would not** change. This is important for backwards compatibility
- +  * ''%%__setStatic()%%'' and ''%%__getStatic()%%'' **will** provide functionality similiar to ''%%__get()%%'' and ''%%__set()%%'' 
- +  * Static classes **cannot** be instantiated 
 +  * Static classes **can** implement interfaces containing only static methods
  
 ===== Code ===== ===== Code =====
rfc/static-classes.1210020930.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/09/22 13:28 (external edit)

Page Tools