Asked  7 Months ago    Answers:  5   Viewed   33 times

There are some posts about this matter, but I didn't clearly get when to use object-oriented coding and when to use programmatic functions in an include. Somebody also mentioned to me that OOP is very heavy to run, and makes more workload. Is this right?

Let's say I have a big file with 50 functions. Why will I want to call these in a class? And not by function_name()? Should I switch and create an object which holds all of my functions? What will be the advantage or specific difference? What benefits does it bring to code OOP in PHP? Modularity?

 Answers

85

In a lot of scenarios, procedural programming is just fine. Using OO for the sake of using it is useless, especially if you're just going to end up with POD objects (plain-old-data).

The power of OO comes mainly from inheritance and polymorphism. If you use classes, but never use either of those two concepts, you probably don't need to be using a class in the first place.

One of the nicest places IMO that OO shines in, is allowing you to get rid of switch-on-type code. Consider:

function drive($the_car){

    switch($the_car){

      case 'ferrari':
          $all_cars->run_ferrari_code();
          break;

      case 'mazerati':
          $all_cars->run_mazerati_code();
          break;

      case 'bentley':
          $all_cars->run_bentley_code();
          break;
    }
}

with its OO alternative:

function drive($the_car){

    $the_car->drive();
}

Polymorphism will allow the proper type of "driving" to happen, based on runtime information.


Notes on polymorphism:

The second example here has some premisses: That is that all car classes will either extend an abstract class or implement an interface.

Both allow you to force extending or implementing classes to define a specific function, such as drive(). This is very powerful as it allows you to drive() all cars without having to know which one you're driving; that is because they're extending an abstract class containing the drive() method or implementing an interface forcing the drive() method to be defined.

So as long as you make sure that all your specific cars either extend the abstract class car or implement an interface such as canBeDriven (both of which must declare the drive() method) you can just call the drive() method on an object which you know is a car (but not what type of car) without fear of it not being defined, as PHP will throw fatal errors at you until you define those methods in your specific car classes.

Wednesday, March 31, 2021
 
Santi
answered 7 Months ago
77

First of all, __get, __set, etc. are defined public and you cannot have them otherwise. Magic methods should be used wisely as it takes about three times as long to make a call to a magic method than simply calling a class method.

class A {
   public function __get($name) { ... }

   public function __getValue() { ... }     // <== is faster

}

Usually (normally, preferably), you will have your class members private or protected (never public) and have accessors and mutators to encapsulate them. Those accessors and mutator may be of any visibility, depending on what the user can do with the members. You may also have immutable classes by declaring only accessors for your members, which are initialized in the constructor only.

So, your sample class should read

class classWithReadOnlyVar {
   private $readOnlyVar;

   public function getReadonlyVar() {
     return $this->readOnlyVar;
   }

}

and should not use the magic methods.

There may be many reasons to avoid using magic methods at all :

  1. they break code completion
  2. they are slower at run-time
  3. they make refactoring and maintenance a bit (lot) harder/complicated
  4. you can't have a protected magic method
  5. etc.

Class members

Their visibility should be private or protected, it all depends if you want them accessible by inheritence. They should never be public as this breaks the OO paradigm.

Example of a protected member:

class A {
    protected $_name = 'A';

    public function getName() { return $this->_name; }
}

class B {
    protected $_name = 'B';   // getName() will not return 'B'
}

(without $_name being protected, this would not be possible, and no need to redefine the accessor)

Accessors

They should be protected or public. Having a private accessor makes no sense; a class should access it's member directly. If the member needs processing, the class will know regardless when to call the accessor or not.

Mutators

They should be protected or public. As for the accessors, it makes no sense to have a private mutator... unless a very rare case when processing needs to be done internally. If a class member has no accessor, it should not have a mutator. It also makes no sense to have a mean to set a value without being able to get the value back somehow.

Wednesday, March 31, 2021
 
Sanguine
answered 7 Months ago
70

I think the correct syntax for referencing ranges of cells in another sheet is:

List!$A$1:$A$10

So you should try:

$objValidation->setFormula1('List!$A$1:$A$10'); // tested it, worked for me

Got the idea from http://phpexcel.codeplex.com/discussions/320393:

->setFormula1("Worksheet!A1:{$endCell}1");// work....

Although this guy had another problem with using named ranges.

Background: I think with:

$objValidation->setFormula1('"$List.$A$1:$A$10"');

you're explicity using the given string between the quotation marks as the list value as explained here: here (where you probably got this snippet in the first place) or here. But since you don't want to use fixed list items but dynamically referred ones, you should omit the double quotation marks.

Saturday, May 29, 2021
 
Ula
answered 5 Months ago
Ula
49

Check if the declaring class matches the class of the object:

$reflector = new ReflectionMethod($ob, 'createTable');
$isProto = ($reflector->getDeclaringClass()->getName() !== get_class($ob));

PHP Manual links:

  • ReflectionMethod
  • ReflectionProperty
Saturday, May 29, 2021
 
ojrac
answered 5 Months ago
31

In order to fully understand what you are trying to achieve here, your desired PHP version should be known first, PHP 7 is more ideal for OOP approaches than any previous version.

If the binding of your anonymous function is the problem, you can bind the scope of a function as of PHP >= 5.4 to an instance, e.g.

$a->testFunc = Closure::bind(function() {
    // here the object scope was gone...
    $this->var = "overridden";
}, $a);

As of PHP >= 7 you can call bindTo immediately on the created Closure

$a->testFunc = (function() {
    // here the object scope was gone...
    $this->var = "overridden";
})->bindTo($a);

Though your approach of what you are trying to achieve is beyond my imagination. Maybe you should try to clarify your goal and I'll workout all possible solutions.

Saturday, May 29, 2021
 
danjah
answered 5 Months ago
Only authorized users can answer the question. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged :