Quantcast

Re: Zend_Config proposal v2

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Zend_Config proposal v2

Matthew Ratzloff
Sorry, I deleted the other e-mail a little too fast, but this is in response
to this:

http://www.akrabat.com/2006/05/13/zend_config-proposal-v2/

Two questions for the Zend team:

- Why would you want to modify config information in memory?
- Why no nested "extends"?

-Matt

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Re: Zend_Config proposal v2

Mike Naberezny-2
Matthew Ratzloff wrote:
> Sorry, I deleted the other e-mail a little too fast, but this is in
> response to this:
>
> http://www.akrabat.com/2006/05/13/zend_config-proposal-v2/
>
> Two questions for the Zend team:
>
> - Why would you want to modify config information in memory?

In the proposal response, we asked that the constructor support an
optional flag to permit modification in memory.  However, the flag can't
be changed after instantiation (to lock read-only mode).  This is to
allow for easier testing of components using Zend_Config.

> - Why no nested "extends"?

We want to discourage spaghetti files.

Mike

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: Re: Zend_Config proposal v2

Andries Seutens
Rob,

I have gone through the Zend_Config V2. Nice job!!

Maybe, it would be *nice* to make the special inheritence keyword "extends"
case insensitive. PHP treats the "extends" keyword similar, when inheriting
from classes.

Regards,

Andries Seutens
Belgium
http://andries.systray.be/blog/

Loading...