[dev] [commits] Horde-Hatchery branch master updated. f0daa2470ea069c3488276d2ecb1f92c6fdc86b3

[Michael M Slusarz]

Quoting Chuck Hagenbuch <chuck at horde.org>:

> Quoting Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:
>
>> commit f0daa2470ea069c3488276d2ecb1f92c6fdc86b3
>> Author: Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at curecanti.org>
>> Date:   Fri Aug 7 12:17:37 2009 -0600
>>
>>    Initial stab at moving base.php code into Application.php
>>
>>    Using IMP as a test case.
>>
>>    Proposed usage:
>>    Every application script directly require_once's Application.php
>>    This inits HORDE_BASE and Autoloading.
>>    To init app, call new ***_Application(array('init' => $foo))
>>    where $foo is either true or an array of options to pass to init().
>>
>>    lib/base.local.php is now config/horde.local.php
>
> -require_once dirname(__FILE__) . '/lib/base.php';
> +require_once dirname(__FILE__) . '/lib/Application.php';
> +new IMP_Application(array('init' => true));
>
> Changing from base.php to Application.php is semantic and fine. I  
> don't like the new IMP_Application line though.
>
> First of all, it screams side effects - creating a new object but  
> not assigning it anywhere.

This is more of a shortcut argument rather than anything else.  Instead of
$app_ob = new IMP_Application();
$app_ob->init(true);

Not a big deal but I don't personally have any issues with creating an  
object and not assigning it to a variable (see, e.g., prototypejs's   
Ajax.Request - you create the request by doing a "new Ajax.Request()"  
and that's it.)  But I have no objections if we'd rather do things the  
latter way rather than the former.

> Second, why the 'init' argument? When do we need this kind of object  
> but not need to init? Is this an instance where a singleton would be  
> appropriate?

There's a bunch of cases where you don't want to init.  perms() will  
normally be static data.  authCredentials() can't require init()  
because there is no user.  No need to call init() for prefs functions  
since it is known that the user is already logged in to IMP (unlike  
the other two, this is solely for performance reasons - doing a  
duplicate init in these functions doesn't hurt anything).

That being said, I have no objections to a singleton.  Especially  
since we should only need to declare that singleton once in the base  
class.

michael

-- 
___________________________________
Michael Slusarz [slusarz at horde.org]