4 ms·
I'm not a fan of that kind of magic in my languages but such a thing was already easily doable in PHP. You could just have a base class that implements __get a
by wvenable 2y ago
I'm not a fan of that kind of magic in my languages but such a thing was already easily doable in PHP. You could just have a base class that implements __get and __set so that $this->foo automatically calls $this->getFoo().
- mgkimsal 2y agocan't do that if you declare the properties on the class. __get only works for undefined properties.
- wvenable 2y agoWell don't do that then. :)
- munk-a 2y agoOr, alternatively, use `__call`
- 9dev 2y agoDoctor, doctor, it always hurts when I press here…
- hks0 2y agoThat advice doesn't always work in real life; otherwise for every compiler or linter check in any language, we could drop all those checks and tell the programmers not to do that. E.g. if a base class declares a variable it can potentially break its children. Whose at fault here? I agree with your original comment though. And if the bypass of exisitng fields is badly wanted, somehow marking __get to disregard them makes more sense to me.